Hodler on Nostr: Ok, under statism we live on the brick of a nuclear war which could wipe out all of ...
Ok, under statism we live on the brick of a nuclear war which could wipe out all of humanity, forced medical experiments on 5 billion people (including children), genocide after genocide, millions of people in cages for owning a plant, children being raped by elites without accountability and a massive extraction of wealth, which translates to a massive decrease in our standard of living, which directly influences life expectancy and happiness for every human being on this planet.
But you want to worry about some rare edge cases? I agree there are some, but come on! Why do you accept all this chaos under statism and require anarchism to be a perfect utopia? Why the double standard?
Ok, let's talk about this rare edge case, which can be solved under the NAP (pollution and abortus are harder to solve, private courts will decide about this): If she is prostituted by her parents you can force them, and obviously the customers. If she does it herself, you have to understand the reality of the world. It isn't nice, but it is reality.
If a child lives in poverty and is about to starve there aren't many options if the economy is bad. Prostitution is slightly less bad than starvation and child labour is less bad than prostitution. By writing laws against those things or coercively stopping them, you only push them into the worse option. State intervention, however good it sounds, will push them from child labour into prostitution and from prostitution into starvation. This isn't a solution, you make a bad situation worse!
However, in a free society (anarchism), people wouldn't be taxed for 50% and inflation wouldn't steal another 8% per year. Poverty would decrease and those sad situations would happen much less. More importantly: We all would have more money TO GIVE TO THIS KID so she DOESN'T NEED to do those terrible things to get food on the table. Why do you want to use violence against the kid, while you can just give her food, money or opportunity and help her out?
But you want to worry about some rare edge cases? I agree there are some, but come on! Why do you accept all this chaos under statism and require anarchism to be a perfect utopia? Why the double standard?
Ok, let's talk about this rare edge case, which can be solved under the NAP (pollution and abortus are harder to solve, private courts will decide about this): If she is prostituted by her parents you can force them, and obviously the customers. If she does it herself, you have to understand the reality of the world. It isn't nice, but it is reality.
If a child lives in poverty and is about to starve there aren't many options if the economy is bad. Prostitution is slightly less bad than starvation and child labour is less bad than prostitution. By writing laws against those things or coercively stopping them, you only push them into the worse option. State intervention, however good it sounds, will push them from child labour into prostitution and from prostitution into starvation. This isn't a solution, you make a bad situation worse!
However, in a free society (anarchism), people wouldn't be taxed for 50% and inflation wouldn't steal another 8% per year. Poverty would decrease and those sad situations would happen much less. More importantly: We all would have more money TO GIVE TO THIS KID so she DOESN'T NEED to do those terrible things to get food on the table. Why do you want to use violence against the kid, while you can just give her food, money or opportunity and help her out?