--- In [email protected], "Cory Nott" <coryn...@...> wrote:

> This is why we have courts and there is no need for
> coercion. 


I'm not sure why you consider courts to be an alternative to coercion. 

The litigants are coerced into attending the court and then are coerced
into complying with the court's decision. The jury members are coerced
into participating, and the judge is paid with money derived from
coercion.

This is a far cry from the voluntary arbitration of a
libertarian society.

---Sasan

Reply via email to