No, such a definition would be anarchy which is mutually exclusive to libertarianism because anarchy is lawlessness, chaos, defenselessness, ignorance, etc.
There is no peaceful anarchy and there is no example of lasting anarchy, not even in iceland which was not ever living in anarchy but who anarchists like to point to as their shining example of success. --- In [email protected], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I don't acquiesce to any definition of liberty that considers the mere > > existance of government to be an initiation of force. > > Of course not Paul. Such a definition would be libertarian. > > BWS > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
