Raw on Nostr: Aight lets get to the law first. The definition hinges on idea of a rule so i asked ...

Aight lets get to the law first.
The definition hinges on idea of a rule so i asked what you meant by it.
Lets see then. If law is enforcement of rule, what about things that does not require enforcement per say. The rule that says you have freedom of speech or privacy. Those does not require enforcement and definetely not enforcement based on theft as you say.
Also who enforces these so called law? If taxes are involved so i infer you mean the government . The goverment theoritically does not require taxes for its operation. If lets say by enforcing rule they exist i.e they enforce their own existence it does not have to be by taxes and theft.
Also 2 private individuals can also be binded by law when enforcement is totally on them not on taxes and theft. Contracts the enforcement of which is on your pokcket and your legitimately earned wealth. Are those not law?
I am just trying to poke holes on your definition.

But, The question I posted was not for description of law as is. It can be described as a lot of thing the question could be worded better like. "What does it mean for a law to be a law" or something like that.
Ps I will read the rules part now and respond to it.