Romans maintained slavery, they still minted coins for debts.
… there’s a reason anarchists are shown washing their hands afterwards.
The cops were the slavers themselves.
Are we redefining ‘cops’ as ‘anyone involved in enforcing societal standards’?
Your comprehension of capere is cognitive dissonance.
… fucking what. Do you not understand what capere is, or are you trying to relate property law to the broader point of a lack of institutional enforcement?
… an 18th century AD etymology has little to do with Roman law, unless your understanding of history, already impressively bad, is even worse than previously suggested. Capere is a legal term in Roman law, so if you aren’t actually using that in its intended meaning, I’d advise you to fuck off and stop embarrassing yourself by trying to pretend to know anything about the subject being discussed.
Did Romans capture and kept slaves, or did they not?
Yes? That was never in dispute. Unless you think cops are a necessary institution for slavery?
Property law to own slaves ? And enforce your demands on them?
They aren’t necessary. That’s not the point of any of this.
The only point being made, as explicitly pointed out in the explanation you failed to read, is that policing institutions are not inherent or necessary to community enforcement of norms and laws, contrary to the copaganda pushed in the modern day. This is, and I quote my fucking self in this very comment section, "An unusual point of unity between an ancient polity noted for its sense of hierarchy, and hierarchy-averse modern anarchist ideology!
And I explicitly pointed out you crossposted to the wrong community, failing to read the sidebar, burrying yourself deeper for master-led policing that Romans enforced in their republics. You may not need a «VIGILES» to reinforce slavery, but you’re in the wrong community to seize our intellects.
And I explicitly pointed out you crossposted to the wrong community, failing to read the sidebar,
Because I… pointed out that a core piece of anarchist ideology is possible, despite the naysaying of many modern statists?
I’m sorry that I didn’t realize supporting the validity of anarchist conceptions of society was against the sidebar of this community. It must be in the special section that only illiterates can see.
burrying yourself deeper for master-led policing that Romans enforced in their republics.
Again, an utterly fucking stupid reading of both the explanation and of Roman law.
You may not need a «VIGILES» to reinforce slavery, but you’re in the wrong community to seize our intellects.
Literally at every stage of this I’ve pointed out that anarchism and the Roman Republic are separate. The only comparison being made is, and I again I fucking quote, “that a core piece of anarchist ideology [enforcement of laws and norms without formal policing forces] is possible, despite the naysaying of many modern statists”
… there’s a reason anarchists are shown washing their hands afterwards.
Are we redefining ‘cops’ as ‘anyone involved in enforcing societal standards’?
… fucking what. Do you not understand what capere is, or are you trying to relate property law to the broader point of a lack of institutional enforcement?
No, the original definition of captors . Did Romans capture and kept slaves, or did they not?
Property law to own slaves ? And enforce your demands on them?
… an 18th century AD etymology has little to do with Roman law, unless your understanding of history, already impressively bad, is even worse than previously suggested. Capere is a legal term in Roman law, so if you aren’t actually using that in its intended meaning, I’d advise you to fuck off and stop embarrassing yourself by trying to pretend to know anything about the subject being discussed.
Yes? That was never in dispute. Unless you think cops are a necessary institution for slavery?
… you do realize what ‘police’ refers to, right.
Pug, why are slavers necessary? Why must anyone be policed by masters?
They aren’t necessary. That’s not the point of any of this.
The only point being made, as explicitly pointed out in the explanation you failed to read, is that policing institutions are not inherent or necessary to community enforcement of norms and laws, contrary to the copaganda pushed in the modern day. This is, and I quote my fucking self in this very comment section, "An unusual point of unity between an ancient polity noted for its sense of hierarchy, and hierarchy-averse modern anarchist ideology!
And I explicitly pointed out you crossposted to the wrong community, failing to read the sidebar, burrying yourself deeper for master-led policing that Romans enforced in their republics. You may not need a «VIGILES» to reinforce slavery, but you’re in the wrong community to seize our intellects.
Begone with this slavepaganda!
Because I… pointed out that a core piece of anarchist ideology is possible, despite the naysaying of many modern statists?
I’m sorry that I didn’t realize supporting the validity of anarchist conceptions of society was against the sidebar of this community. It must be in the special section that only illiterates can see.
Again, an utterly fucking stupid reading of both the explanation and of Roman law.
what
What anarchism did Roman Slavers praxied?
Literally at every stage of this I’ve pointed out that anarchism and the Roman Republic are separate. The only comparison being made is, and I again I fucking quote, “that a core piece of anarchist ideology [enforcement of laws and norms without formal policing forces] is possible, despite the naysaying of many modern statists”