>You know "campaign contributions" are an euphemism for bribes, don't you?
Sure, US democracy is badly implemented, but that doesn't mean the idea is inherently flawed. If you want to argue that it is, feel free. But until you do, please stop pretending there is no alternative to your false dichotomy.
>Do you sincerely think the main reason why people don't steal from others is that they'd be punished for it?
No, but most people following the rules of their own volition is not sufficient for the system to work. If you make it truly "voluntary", then anyone who doesn't agree can just take whatever they want.
> if you actually have a problem with "coercion in the distribution of resources"
I don't, as I said it's inevitable. I just object to libertarians pretending they can avoid it.
Sure, US democracy is badly implemented, but that doesn't mean the idea is inherently flawed. If you want to argue that it is, feel free. But until you do, please stop pretending there is no alternative to your false dichotomy.
>Do you sincerely think the main reason why people don't steal from others is that they'd be punished for it?
No, but most people following the rules of their own volition is not sufficient for the system to work. If you make it truly "voluntary", then anyone who doesn't agree can just take whatever they want.
> if you actually have a problem with "coercion in the distribution of resources"
I don't, as I said it's inevitable. I just object to libertarians pretending they can avoid it.