So. I think I'm an anarchist

[powerofreason]

Here's another good article, about private law in general.

http://mises.org/story/2542

 

[Truth Warrior]

Is Voting an Act of Violence? by Carl Watner

 

[enter`name`here]

As an anarchist I do not feel the state will ever be eliminated, I do not see a contradiction in this position. Do we stop trying to fight murder simply because we realize we will never be able to completely eliminate it? The question isn't will there be a group of armed assholes trying to install themselves as petty dictators, as there always will be no matter what system of (non)government you have in place. The question is do we stand up to them and fight? or do we lie down and accept their dominion over us?

 

[Truth Warrior]

As an anarchist I do not feel the state will ever be eliminated, I do not see a contradiction in this position. Do we stop trying to fight murder simply because we realize we will never be able to completely eliminate it? The question isn't will there be a group of armed assholes trying to install themselves as petty dictators, as there always will be no matter what system of (non)government you have in place. The question is do we stand up to them and fight? or do we lie down and accept their dominion over us?

If the state is not eliminated, our species may eventually be.<IMHO> Chalked up as just yet one more of nature's FAILED experiments.

A couple of Albert Einstein quotes:

"We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive."

"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

 

[RevolutionSD]

Ron Paul's movement really woke me up to libertarian and traditional limited government conservatism. Now, however, I feel like even a libertarian government is too much. Why? Because it will only grow after it's downsized. I know anarchists don't believe in capitalism and that is probably the one glaring difference that I am struggling with. On one hand, I agree with it. On the other, I think it is something that easily turns into corporatism, fascism, socialism etc.

I'm totally with you man. I went from Libertarian to RP suppoter to anarchist. I no longer have any use for government.

Check out www.freedomainradio.com and download "Real Time Relationships" pdf (free) for the real red pill. Also listen to some of the podcasts. Amazing stuff.

 

[Truth Warrior]

I'm totally with you man. I went from Libertarian to RP suppoter to anarchist. I no longer have any use for government.

Check out www.freedomainradio.com and download "Real Time Relationships" pdf (free) for the real red pill. Also listen to some of the podcasts. Amazing stuff.

Very on the PDFs. Thanks!

 

[cujothekitten]

Hey anarcho-capitalists, if you haven't joined anarchme yet please do so now

http://anarchme.ning.com/

It's a new little community that's growing quickly. It's mostly centered around capitalism but here are some mutualists and syndicalists there as well. There's a few projects that could use more people as well.

 

[Andrew-Austin]

Once a defense market is established, after private police and courts it would be very difficult for a new regime to take hold. I imagine a gradual abolition of government. If the abolition were immediate, then yes, I think its highly likely that a dictatorship would arise.

Would you agree that a libertarian society must mature, and be the intermediate step, before anarchism can be reached? I think otherwise, say if we reached anarchy a month from now, people would soon be clamoring for government because they wouldn't know what to do with themselves.

 

[Truth Warrior]

Without FIRST stopping the GROWTH of government, all of the points are merely moot.<IMHO>

 

[powerofreason]

Would you agree that a libertarian society must mature, and be the intermediate step, before anarchism can be reached?

Sparsely populated rural areas would be ok. More heavily populated areas, like cities would no doubt experience a chaotic period if government were immediately removed. Rothbard figured there would be chaos for a few days in the cities, but that it would eventually subside, seeing as criminals are a small minority of the population. Former police would inevitably form private police agencies and order would begin to be re-established. During this period there is a risk that some group of people will declare that they are the government, but how would they establish legitimacy? In other words, why would anyone even pay attention to them? Or maybe the U.N. will try to meddle? I don't know. The sudden removal of government is a very strange hypothetical situation, so its hard to take into account every variable and the circumstances under which that might happen. I imagine that over time a sort of paradigm shift will take place and people will see government for what it is. The state will be whittled down to services like police and courts, and then inevitably experimentation will take place with private courts and police. I'm not saying any of this will happen in our lifetimes, but if humanity lasts long enough its sort of inevitable, right? It'll be tried one day in a modern and civilized society.

 

[constituent]

Are you ignoring the evidence I'm offering to you, or do you have a learning disability? I'm a patient guy though

No, you are a dullard.

You applaud TW's pointing out that religion and politics (both systems of control) are one and the same. Then you go on to tell me that what you're offering is not itself of the very same ilk of government as it now stands?

You admit that enforcement requires the use of force, correct?

Pretending as if we're going to live in little just, equitable communes like those mentioned in the essay (that had nothing to do w/ anarchy) is trippin', plain and simple.

If you don't understand that, this conversation is not worth continuing.

 

[constituent]

http://mises.org/story/2542

i see, you do fancy yourself as some sort of feudal lord in your mythical, utopian, "anarchist" government...

like i said, just as bad as the commies, but in a different way.

 

[Blowback]

It seems to me that the main reason governments exist is due to missinformation.

People accept the various governement monoplies (e.g. defense and law) as necessary because that is what they have been told their whole life.

 

[Truth Warrior]

It seems to me that the main reason governments exist is due to missinformation.

People accept the various governement monoplies (e.g. defense and law) as necessary because that is what they have been told their whole life.

The "brainwashing" begins at a very early age.

 

[AbolishTheGovt]

How will you ensure that Anarchy will sustain?

The criminal gangs and neo-Barbarians will rule the streets and the guy with the biggest stick will be the leader.

As though that were not the very definition of involuntary government.

 

[josephadel_3]

I am glad many people are waking up to the fact that government in any form is bad and destructive and that limited government will never be able to stay bound to its limits. I realized this too over the course of the campaign after 4 years of being a minarchist.

However, you are wrong about anarchists not believing in capitalism. Anarcho-capitalists believe completely in capitalism and the free market. I do.

No, I'm not wrong, in fact a large sect of anarchists don't agree with capitalism and see it as a type of force and control over another person.

And for risk of repeating myself, anarcho-capitalism is a fairly new theory in the territory of anarchisms. There are individual anarchists who would be less hostile to capitalism and then there are the anarcho-communist types like the guys from Rage Against the Machine. I tend towards individualism because humans aren't a pack animal. Maybe communism works for dogs, but even then there's hierarchy and inequality.

I am tending towards anarchy in a philosophical sense mostly. This whole idea of owning land is absurd when you think of it. We came from the Earth and it gave us life, yet somehow we claim ownership to it with borders and such. It's land mass in it's purest form. If everyone thought like that, there would be no war, maybe small, local ones, but nothing massive with brigades representing a giant land mass of people with a usually nationalistic mindset.

 

[Truth Warrior]

No, I'm not wrong, in fact a large sect of anarchists don't agree with capitalism and see it as a type of force and control over another person.

And for risk of repeating myself, anarcho-capitalism is a fairly new theory in the territory of anarchisms. There are individual anarchists who would be less hostile to capitalism and then there are the anarcho-communist types like the guys from Rage Against the Machine. I tend towards individualism because humans aren't a pack animal. Maybe communism works for dogs, but even then there's hierarchy and inequality.

I am tending towards anarchy in a philosophical sense mostly. This whole idea of owning land is absurd when you think of it. We came from the Earth and it gave us life, yet somehow we claim ownership to it with borders and such. It's land mass in it's purest form. If everyone thought like that, there would be no war, maybe small, local ones, but nothing massive with brigades representing a giant land mass of people with a usually nationalistic mindset.

And you are here posting on the RPF, why?

 

[josephadel_3]

The idea of living in a peaceful state of anarchy is Utopian nonsense. Its the stuff college kids talk about after too many hours of Dungeons and Dragons and too many beers.

Yes, I hear all the crazy theories about "contracting for defense" and police and whatever else- its utterly absurd.

First off, any "defense" you can contract is going to need leaders- effective military organizations aren't anarchist in nature. Whoever leads that group could decide, at any time, that he'd rather TAKE your money than work for you under contract- at which point, your Utopian anarchy ends, and you become a slave.

BTW, there have been plenty of instances where people have been thrown into anarchy throughout history, for a variety of reasons. NONE of them has resulted in a Utopian, peaceful, prosperous society. ALL have ended in dictatorship of one form or another.

I said nothing about contracting for defense and police. This was someone else. I am merely struggling with limited government, because in truth it is never limited, and never has been, if only for a few years. But yes, throwing out value judgements such as "absurd" and belittling those who disagree with you by calling them drunken geeks is never appropriate to intelligent debate.

 

[josephadel_3]

And you are here posting on the RPF, why?

Because I support Ron Paul. I said I "think" I'm an anarchist. I don't know. If you noticed I kind of conveyed the idea I thought government power was evil. It is coercion of man by man, a monopoly on force. I supported and support his message because he was a peace candidate intent on downsizing that monopoly. Ron Paul would have cut down the size of government drastically, or as much as he could have with a neoconservative Congress.

I don't have to agree with every single thing Ron Paul believes to post on a forum dedicated to him. Lot's of his supporters came from the Left wing Democratic and Green parties. Are you gonna question their presence here?

 

[josephadel_3]

Oh, and monarchs used to use "republic" and "democracy" as synonyms for chaos, just as anarchy is incorrectly used as a synonym for chaos today. It is the current order wishing to maintain itself. Brains don't like to change, therefore the current order of things wants to remain the same.