Who will hand out IDs?

Since it’s none of the state’s business who I am, or where I go to/have been to, the state has nothing to do with handing out proof-of-Identification. To be able to enter my own home, unless I built a lock into my door, that worked that way.
Basically, every lock does, but carrying a mechanical or electrical key is enough evidence of identity for the vast majority of people, or typing a code into a key pad is.
So why would I not be allowed anywhere near my own home without a piece of paper or plastic with my photo+name on it? And why are those passports designed so dumbly? Because the old design for a passport, did not have a rigid plastic card built into them, so they were too easy to forge.
So nowadays, the owner (assuming that’s the person who’s picture+name is on it, not the government) can not reliably travel to another country with a passport.
Because the brittle plastic card in it (used to display your photo, name, date of birth, etc.) has a tendency to break when you sit on it, or whatever, making it harder for you to leave or get home, and since that is supposed to be the purpose of a passport, that is something the government fails at again, and this time, it isn’t even one of their permissable roles; it’s just an annoyance/hindrance, that serves no real purpose.

“But if you let just anybody into the country,”

Then what? Would you get upset if you lived in, say, Amsterdam, and the house next to yours got bought & inhabited by someone from the city of Deventer? Different city, different province, even! But because its the same country you suddenly don’t mind. But if those people moved out of the city of Bottrop, Germany, suddenly it is an issue worth getting upset about. Germany is a country immediately next to the Netherlands, they actually share a border. How is moving out of Germany different from moving out of Overijssel (the province where the city of Deventer is located)? Of course, people get really upset if it’s people from, say, Arabia or Africa, those are even worse than Germany (or Belgium, France, the UK – they Brexited the EU, proof they don’t even want to be our friends anymore!)

“They would use all sorts of government (taxpayer funded) services.”

So? Just abolish government / remove those services from the claws of government, where they don’t belong, anyway.

“Well, people from Overijssel pay the same taxes as we do.”
So, shared #victimhood is your criterion for acceptance? So Stockholm of you, dude!
I would get upset, if they started paying taxes here: more loot for the evil institution, that is against my interests.

What is the only legitimate purpose of an ID? Proof of identity when signing a contract, you don’t need a government registration for that!

I strongly feel that we need to popularize our

    I strongly feel that we need to popularize our message, by writing bestselling novels, making good movies, to prep the populace’s minds.

    Why am I confident that anarchist/minarchist literature (when done well) will reach a wide audience?

    Well, almost everyone I speak hates the government, they just don’t know how to get along without one yet.

    Plus: take the 5 Ps of marketing:

    1. Product
    2. Place
    3. Price
    4. Promotion
    5. Purple cow (anarchist lit has a very big purple cow factor, because it’s so outrageous)

    Purple cow means: you’re walking along a field with some friends, when you suddenly see a purple cow. That’s when you start prodding people: “Hey! Look at that cow there!” Anarchist literature has that in droves.

    So this P really means getting others to do the marketing for you.

    I feel we must emphasize the aspects of (legal) order without government / economic distress with/caused by government, not without government. And of course any other aspects that people still think they need government for: to protect us from (as if the government is willing to protect us from anything) “islamic terrorism” (which is obviously just a counter-terrorist response to western (christian) terrorism.) So by all means write a historical novel about the crusades, using bomber jets, instead of swords, and, in ordercto make it more realist: include how the attackers are compelled to attend church services in the army’s chappels, as was instated under GWB.

    Or let yourself be inspired by watching “Fascism in colour” on Utube, and consider how the current right wing is trying to do the same thing with the help of islamic terrorists. And, thanks to the disgust with the left, the left as cutltivated in many, the right i qute succesful at it, too. Sheep led to the slaughter. Sadly, thrley’re taking everyone with them.

    The role of government, ep. 2: titles to land/protection of property

    To expand upon episode 1: (which was also about ownership rights) registering/protecting/enforcing ownership rights/titles is a fairly legitimate role of government, one it fails at. But it would be considered (by anarchists/minarchists) to be a task, that it would be OK for government to perform.

    Sadly for statists, this task can also easily be performed by market institutions. Because assigning the role of protecting title (ownership) to government, requires that all ownership of land falls into the hands of government (either by default primordial declaration “This region is our region, so all the land here, is ours”, or bybway of asset forfeiture, which is a super crooked way for government to steal stuff from legal owners), and then government sells (or leases) the land to a party, keeping a copy of the sales agreement, so that, in case of dispute, the government remembers which party is the registered owner, and can thus levy taxes for the land ownership. (!)

    So long as the owner can define which land they own (eg by stating coordinates, or by referring to “all the land between these landmarks (like mountains, or lakes)”, a respected company can perform this duty of registrar. d

     would of course pose the risk of this registrar being bought up, and then ruling in favor of its parent company, when it would try to by up land owned by another.

    This qualm can be partly waylayed by pointing to the high price of purchasing the company, bring a deterrent for any such scheme. The registrar (R) would serve no further purpose anymore, after this scam has been pulled of. So the malicious company (M) would want to sell it off but if the reputation had gotten smeared by these practices, it woufld prove hard to sell, so M would be stuck with R.

    Of course, it is still possible that proceeds from the sale/exploitation of the land is worth the price M paid for R, so M would only have to implode R to rid themselves of that deadweight, if some companylies were to do this with all the land, and registrars, and they wouod merge making one single big company that owns all the land, firning a deacto new government. Perhaps instead of via a company (which is fallible), this could be arranged via block chain, or by having a chain of trusted registrars register the title of land/businesses, perhaps each registrar guards only one part of the title.

    It seems silly to keep a government, for fear of the risk of a (new) government. We now have 100% certainty of a government, and in this future scenario, there is a significamtly smaller chance if that.

    The roles of government, ep. 1

    One of the (very few) acceptable roles of government is, to defend property rights. These include:

    • The defense against bodily harm, caused by an attacker (because you and you alone own your body)
    • The defense of house and hearth from a foreign invading country
    • The defense of material posessions (like your TV or your bank balance) from robbers/thieves.

    The latter makes government an impossibility, because: government funds itself via theft: extracted (involuntarily paid) taxes.

    So government is inherently incapable of fulfilling it’s roles, due to how it funds itself.