Heh. So if I say DPR was an anarcho capitalist and also not a nice guy (two things that are very likely to be true), that's an insult, but calling me an authoritarian is not an insult?
Of course it's an insult. I actually said "authoritarian asshole" IIRC. So, yeah, I wanted to insult you, after you broadly compared ancaps like me with potential murderers. I believed I've manage to control my temper better than you did, though.
EDIT: Once more justusrainver put it better than me, so I'll just quote him:
Now I'll add on "disingenuous" to "authoritarian". Instead of owning up to what you said, you're now trying to obscure the issue by subtly rewriting history to change your quote into something other than what it was.
You didn't say "DPR was A and B", you said "Because DPR was A and B, we shouldn't be surprised of C".
Let's replace B with a different adjective, just to make the bigotry blindingly obvious for all the spectators:
"By the way - I'm amazed at how many people are surprised that a drug dealer with extreme black tendencies turned out to be not a swell guy! Imagine that!"
You'd never dare say something like that in public, because that group isn't an socially acceptable target for bigotry any more, but you're more than willing to smear anarcho-capitalists the same way because you think no one will call you out on it.
Briefly: Ulbricht subscribed to a philosophy that boiled down to "the state is inherently bad and must be overthrown". He explicitly said that was his belief several times in public. Why do you think people tolerate or support the state, as a political institution? It's because we know what the world looks like when the state becomes weak or disappears. It looks like Mexico or Somalia. Not some peaceful, non-violent utopia but a place dominated by men like Ulbricht - people who are quite willing to assassinate anyone who gets in the way of their business empire.
Sigh... I won't derail this rapidly growing topic. But you're just ignorant and should read a bit more on ethics and economics.
