It's Not Just a Difference of Opinion
Written by Cash Snowden.
Statists, this is for you. You like to call the fact that I take issue with non-consensual interactions my ‘political opinion.’ When I object to the initiation of violence against non-aggressors, you call this my ‘theory.’ When I explain the non-aggression principle, and you reject it as misguided, in order to not express rage equal to that of a mother defending her baby’s life, I must summon all my resolve to remain calm. Most of the time I manage to pull this off quite well. I remember I don’t need you to be different than you are. I don’t require you to understand. You don’t know any better.
You aren’t the only one. Most people are just like you. I must remind myself “They know not what they do.” Statists are not capable at all of understanding the righteous outrage that seizes my body when they tell me that we should just agree to disagree about the initiation of force against peaceful non-aggressors. “Not everyone will agree with your political opinions,” statists tell me. “You just have to accept that we have a difference of opinion.” You, statists, know not what you say, no matter how much it seems like you do understand, and that you just don’t care, you really don’t understand. If you did understand you would care.
Statists, a difference of opinion is like this: Lisa likes chocolate ice cream and you like strawberry. So the two of you each buy the kind you like. That’s a difference of opinion.
But what you call a difference of opinion is more like this: Here comes the ice cream truck. You say to Lisa “You shouldn’t eat chocolate. Strawberry is better. I eat strawberry, so you should like it too.”
“But I like chocolate,” she replies. “I’m getting chocolate. I have enough money.”
“You are getting STRAWBERRY! It’s the rule,” you say.
“You’re not the boss of me! I’m getting chocolate with my money,” says Lisa.
“You’re an anti-rule extremist, and a criminal,” you tell Lisa. “So I’m gonna tie you to that tree.” When she resists, you escalate the level of force and kick her ass black and blue until she stops resisting. You tie her to the tree, and take her ice cream money. The truck comes and you buy two STRAWBERRY ice cream treats. The truck leaves, and you let Lisa loose, tossing her the strawberry.
“You didn’t buy that ice cream on your own,” you say, “so you owe me a favor now, Lisa. That’s the deal.”
“I didn’t make any deals!! You’re not the boss of me!!” screams Lisa.
“You better calm down and stop disturbing my peace, or else.” You say.
Can you see how kicking someone’s ass, or using government for caging or killing someone who refuses to let you force your own opinions onto them is not just “a difference of opinion?”
That line of consent, which separates sex from rape, gift from robbery, and volunteer work from slavery is a line you have within you just like everyone else. You find it bad when your self ownership is violated, just like everyone else.
So when you advocate threatening and violating non-aggressive people for not obeying the mandates of your gang who outnumbers them, that in itself is a threat and a violation, every bit as much as someone issuing credible threats to rape, rob, enslave or murder innocent people. It’s no different than a Mob boss advocating to his boys that they beat certain people who don’t respect his commandments for their lives.
This ‘opinion’ you hold makes you an aggressor, not just someone with a different opinion. Because defense against aggressors is justifiable defense, like all Voluntaryists I consistently practice and show tremendous restraint, because you truly don’t have any idea what you are saying and doing. You’re in a propaganda induced trance. But when a Voluntaryist loses his temper, or handles a disagreement with you not as well as he could, that mishap happened for a reason.
That reason is that you’re not a non-aggressor. You’re not just expressing opinions.
You’re supporting, and calling for, victimizations of innocent peaceful people who disobey your opinions. By willingly supporting it, you’re an accessory to, a willing participant in, the routine initiation of violation, violence and non-consensual interactions.
But you know not what you do. You really do imagine it’s just a ‘difference of opinion.’ So instead of resorting to justifiable defensive force, over and over I will calm myself, and I’ll patiently explain, and I will keep patiently explaining, until you wake up and see that willingly participating in, calling for and defending aggression is a form of aggression. Violating people who have not violated anyone else is NOT OKAY. Willingly advocating, defending, and paying to impose rulers onto unwilling victims, because they didn’t obey your gang? It’s more than just an opinion, and it is not okay.
“Obey my gang or be caged” is not an opinion.
“Be caged without resisting or be executed” is not an opinion.