Question for anarchists - How would you handle national defense?

[Stupified]

They could, if they wanted to.

What's stopping them?

Rutger produces weapons, and they could choose to do computers. What would stop them if they wanted to do that?

Well good then, I've already outlined the inevitable conclusion to that scenario:

But let's say that someone does pay for your military. Let's say it was Apple. INSTANTLY the balance of power has changed. Apple is now the patron of that military defense company, and as such has a higher stake in the war, in the economy, and more power in its hands. Power corrupts, and power breeds power. Say goodbye to your utopia, because Apple is your government now.

Sorry friend, but human traits do not lend themselves to anarchy. Haven't you read Lord of the Flies?

 

[Black Flag]

Who pays for their R&D? Who pays for their materials? Who pays for their scientists and engineers and manual laborers and robotics and electricity and every other bill they have?

Gasp!

The economic illiteracy is simply mind boggling.

Who pays for Apples R&D, materials, scientists and engineers ...right now?!?!

But let's say

No, let's not say.

Start providing some rational argument and reasoning based on some fundamental principle - all you have been doing making up stories and baseless scenarios that are utterly meaningless.

 

[Black Flag]

Sorry friend, but human traits do not lend themselves to anarchy. Haven't you read Lord of the Flies?

Oh, God....

Now you use a fantasy story as some sort of "proof".

 

[Black Flag]

Exactly. They are an organized group of men doing what few other men could do. Sound like a military? It does to me. It also sounds like a far cry from a "pick-up group" which is what you compared an anarchist militia to.

So, you have some bizarre notion that only organized things come from government??
or is it:
every organization is government

 

[Black Flag]

Well good then, I've already outlined the inevitable conclusion to that scenario:

No, you have not.

You made up a story.

You have not reasoned why free men, who endeavor to be free, would irrationally change simply because they organize themselves and build tools for their defense?

 

[Black Flag]

You're begging the question. If a society chooses a state, is it moral?

A majority vote does not make something wrong into a right, evil into good, immoral into moral.

It merely means the majority made a choice.

PS: That is not begging the question - you are the one who posited a serious misunderstanding, and I corrected you.

 

[Stupified]

Gasp!

The economic illiteracy is simply mind boggling.

Who pays for Apples R&D, materials, scientists and engineers ...right now?!?!

I'll humor you. Their customers.


WHO BUYS THE JET PLANES IN AN ANARCHIST SOCIETY? Who foots the $50 mil/plane bill?

I feel like I have to scream in all caps in order to get you to address some of this shit I've been asking for five pages.

Oh, God....

Now you use a fantasy story as some sort of "proof".

Sigh. It was a joke, hence the smiley face. It was also an attempt to reign the argument in and bring back the light hearted debate, but that obviously failed.

 

[otherone]

A majority vote does not make something wrong into a right, evil into good, immoral into moral.

It merely means the majority made a choice.

I'm sorry....I wasn't clear. In an anarchist society, let's say, 80% of the Freemen choose not to fight (perhaps they were bribed by the enemy?) and the anarchist "nation" is absorbed by an outside state. Is this moral? The freemen "chose" money over Liberty...it's their choice, right?

 

[Black Flag]

WHO BUYS THE JET PLANES IN AN ANARCHIST SOCIETY? Who foots the $50 mil/plane bill

Who foots the bill right now??

The customer.

PS: I am not a humorous guy, sorry. Things like that go right over my head.

 

[otherone]

Haven't you read Lord of the Flies?

It's weird that you've brought this up...only yesterday I've taken this out of the library to read to my family. The important point to take away from all of this is:
politics is anthropology, not philosophy.

 

[Wesker1982]

You're begging the question. If a society chooses a state, is it moral?

If 10/10 people choose it, it is not a State. The State must impose a territorial monopoly through the initiation of force (this is why your non-violently acquired house it not a State), or else the governance we are talking about is Voluntaryism. If people are allowed to opt out (this does not mean giving up their justly acquired property at gunpoint), then we do not oppose whatever it is that you care to call it.

If 9/10 people want it, and force the last guy, it is not moral.

A lot of time could probably be saved if a lot of you answered this question honestly: Do you think the individual should have the right to secede, or do you think they should be violently forced to stay?

 

[otherone]

Who foots the bill right now??

The customer.

BY THEFT!
wasn't that the whole point of this?

 

[Stupified]

Who foots the bill right now??

The customer.

...... Serious?

The customer is the government. Who pays for it by... taxing its population.

 

[otherone]

A lot of time could probably be saved if a lot of you answered this question honestly: Do you think the individual should have the right to secede, or do you think they should be violently forced to stay?

HAH!!!!!
Absolutely the individual should have the Right to secede....and in the US, they could, up until the the 14th amendment!!!!

 

[Stupified]

It's weird that you've brought this up...only yesterday I've taken this out of the library to read to my family. The important point to take away from all of this is:
politics is anthropology, not philosophy.

It's a pretty decent musing of how anarchy can go wrong (and more importantly, why). Obviously it's a little extreme, but I think Golding had a valid point.

 

[Black Flag]

I'm sorry....I wasn't clear. In an anarchist society, let's say, 80% of the Freemen choose not to fight (perhaps they were bribed by the enemy?) and the anarchist "nation" is absorbed by an outside state. Is this moral? The freemen "chose" money over Liberty...it's their choice, right?

20% is more than enough.

Right now, the US military is only 1/300th.....

And yes, if freemen wish to sell themselves to slavery - who has the right to stop them?

1 Samuel 8

4 So all the elders gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.”

6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. 7 And the LORD told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”

10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights:

He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12

Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties,

and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest,

and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13

He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14

He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15

He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16

Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17

He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves.18

When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”

21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, “Listen to them and give them a king.”

 

[Black Flag]

It's weird that you've brought this up...only yesterday I've taken this out of the library to read to my family. The important point to take away from all of this is:
politics is anthropology, not philosophy.

All things come from ideas.

If the idea is flawed, so are the things.

 

[Seraphim]

Voluntaryism/An-cap has no nation. National defence is not necessary. What IS necessary is the protection of private property.

I'd love to see exterior forces try to overtake an area that has self sufficient families who are NOT part of State tax farm.

Good fucking luck. The exterior forces would shit themselves just thinking of it, let alone actually being able to do it.

 

[otherone]

1 Samuel 8

4 So all the elders gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.”

dang...Black Flag's gone all OT on me.

 

[Black Flag]

...... Serious?

The customer is the government. Who pays for it by... taxing its population.

Correct - but the money comes from the people.

So, asking "where does the money come from" ... comes from the same people.

The only difference:
one is coerced, the other way is voluntary.

But the ability and capacity is unchanged