Nonetheless, what's the point of educating if even the "educated" like Ron & myself, who completely agree with theoretical underpinnings of AC, can't jump over that final valley? What I'm saying is that there will have to be a "bridge", a temporary measure, without which all the educating will be pointless anyway!
Not going to respond to everything, just wanted to jump in and comment on this.
The [perhaps unfortunate] truth is, people like yourself and Ron don't need to necessarily jump over that final valley, which is to say whether you or Ron make that jump is largely irrelevant beyond its significance to and impact on your own individual lives, and worldview.
Most anarchist types tend to accept the fact that ending the State isn't going to happen over night. But many anarchist types also tend to accept that ending the State isn't going to be done through legislation or the State's political system either. The point of focusing on education is to instill in people a set of core principles--self-ownership, property rights, NAP--which, when followed to their logically consistent end, can only lead to one conclusion, that they may pass these values down to their children, and families, and so on. Ending the State tomorrow would, in all likelihood, lead to widespread panic, chaos, and destruction that is all entirely detrimental and counterproductive because the culture, and even many within the so-called 'liberty movement,' are still dependent on and faithful to statism. So the point of education is to shatter those illusions, and highlight how erroneous they've always been, and will always continue to be so that perhaps in the future, our children, or grandchildren, or great grandchildren will be able to enjoy a relatively peaceful society. The alternative is continuing to put faith, time, energy, effort, and dollars into statism, and perpetuate the pointless parasitic cycle while reaffirming that statism is the sole solution to society's problems and height of human civilization in the same breath.
So, you don't have to make that leap if you aren't prepared to; but if you're not making the leap because you can't answer every single question or issue that you might be able to imagine, then that's going to continue to be an impossible leap to make. I think, once you recognize and accept that you, nor anyone else, will ever have all the answers, or will ever have the perfect solution to all possible, potential, hypothetical, and theoretical problems that leap becomes more of a hop. But, if you're still not prepared to make that hop, as a necessary consequence, you should then be prepared to accept that you are setting an example that promotes statism to those you may influence, whether you want to be promoting statism or not. And the more people that promote statism there are, the longer it will take for the culture to ultimately evolve away from statism.
Now, if you truly believe in statism, that's one thing. But if you know it's not right, then I would suggest it is your moral duty to oppose it, not promote it. You mention that sustainability is a problem for you, but the truth is we will never know until we try, will we? On the other hand, we, as a species, have tried statism ad nauseam, haven't we? What State has ever proven itself to be sustainable? Statism is historically and demonstrably unsustainable, and as an added bonus tends to leave a swath of death and destruction in its wake.
Indeed.passages from the Book that raises high and fiery debate, it is now minute markers from Youtube videos of the deity that the sects of paul choose to vent their engorged spleens.
