Originally Posted by issodhos
Originally Posted by toots sure
The water on my land is mine, not the property of my neighbor until and if it gets there. It most certainly does not belong to the State. The state exists only to protect me from 'physical attack'.

I repeat my questions: If there is a difference of opinion on this matter, who is the impartial judge? Who appoints the impartial judge? Who picks the appointer of the impartial judge?

If you review what I wrote you will see I wrote that the government has as a responsibility, " to secure and to protect the natural rights of the individual. This does not mean that the laws would reflect all the same laws that are in effect today, because the basic premise within a libertarian society is neither the state nor the individual can aggress against another except to defend against a physical attack."

I am not sure why you would think that there could not be a judiciary in a libertarian-oriented society (we are not speaking of anarcho-capitalism here). The judiciary as well as police would be a part of protecting the natural rights of the citizen. I don't see an issue, here.
Yours,
Issodhos

It will feel so much better to be sued by tree-hugging libertarians who want to dictate how loud I can play my music, how smelly my pigs can make the down wind air, and whine to the authorities that the water in the stream is a little deadly.

I'll feel so free!

You may see a big difference in a libertarian zoning board trampling my rights and a libertarian cop taser-ing me and a libertarian IRS collecting my money to pay for all this libertarian natural "rights protecting."

I don't
Reminds me of Bush and his 'dictatorship" vision.
It's fine as long as he gets to be the dictator.

Since you won't say who gets to pick these thugs, I'll assume it's a libertarian collective of busy-body do-gooders.

'Meet the new boss....'