>>>>>>For reasons best known to yourself,<<<<<

Actually, no, I have gone to a great deal of trouble to explain WHY I hold the positions I do. There is no mystery.

>>>> you have chosen to go on and on and on and on today in attempts to prove not only that I am wrong, but that my ideas are "evil."<<<

Some humans claiming the right to aggress against other humans and their property is evil, as is stealing from them, brainwashing them and their children and claiming it is education, etc., etc.

>>>>This is quite a charge to make on a public forum, and naturally I object to it. I believe it is unfair and wildly inaccurate to characterize my ideas as evil. If you believe that is true and that failing to denounce them puts you "in league" with evil, then please don't read my posts.<<<<<

Theft, murder, lying, brainwashing, enslavement, forced association, all of these are evil things. Insisting that “we” “all” “must” choose between evils to be “good citizens” is simply demanding that people choose evils. Now, I disagree and do not want to choose evil but defend YOUR right to live that way. I simply deny YOUR right to insist that I do and that if I don’t that I am evil, a bad “citizen”, “selfish”, etc. We do not share the same values or worldview. I see no reason why we should. You insist that we must, that people must not have the option to be free. You claim that “excluding” people is wrong. You do not use the word evil, but you INSIST that people have no right to discriminate in their associations, that this is a wrong thing. This is a set up for dysfunction. Forcing association is forcing the dialectic, the endless bickering over whose values will be shoved onto who…always restricting someones liberty or seizing their property to benefit another. It is key to maintaining a highly centralized state.

>>>>Yet denouncing nearly everything I say here seems to have become your favorite pastime.<<<<

You expect to post stuff like that unchallenged? You certainly feel free to challenge my posts.

>>>>>It is as if you feel that you and you alone are entitled to comment on what Gatto's research and work on education mean, especially pertaining to governance.<<<<<

?? On what are you basing this statement? I have never tried to silence anyone here. JTGs work speaks for itself, no one has to say “what it means“.

>>>>This is something I doubt Gatto would ever do, especially since he seems to have as many readers of liberal political persuasion as any other. <<<<

You are certainly free to comment at will. And so am I. I have no issue with “liberals” per se, it is when they insist that “we” “all” must be statists that disagreement arises, as in your opining that traditionally religious parents cause all the violence and wars of the world and claim the need for monitoring them….”for the children”, of course.

>>>>Yet you seem to treat this forum as if it were your own private property, open only to whatever notions of governance you and lewrockwell.com may dream up.<<<<

Nonsense. I defend my positions, you can’t defend what you endorse because it is inherently wrong….if one accepts that theft, murder, lying, brainwashing kids, and forced association is wrong. You accept that these things are wrong only under certain conditions.

>>>>You claim that privatized force would only be used to defend private property and person, but you have no way of knowing that.<<<<<

I never claimed that. That is the only force that would be legitimate. There would be those who would aggress and bully, just as there are now, both “privately” AND in the state class. And we have much less ability to defend against the amount of aggression going on now than we would in a society without a monstrously huge state class with its armies and militarized “police”. I have repeatedly posted that I have no way of knowing the exact appearance of society given the liberty to pursue their own ends rather than the ends of the state ruling elites. I imagine it would be quite diverse. None of this need worry you, you certainly would be free to form a state, probably more of a city-state and carry on as you are now, just on a much smaller scale.