Anarchy is Dumb

[guerilla]

Being a little bit older than most people here, I remember the USSR. It was a superpower on par with America.

At least, that is how we regarded it in the west. Many mainstream economists predicted the communists would eventually overtake America industrially.

In truth, it was rotten and backwards behind the iron curtain.

A testament to the power of propaganda.

Belief in western democratic statism is rooted in propaganda as well. It's certainly not based on reason or evidence.

 

[SnapJacks]

This secular western style of government you love so much is less than 100 years old. I don't think it will last another 100 years.

^ Agreed

That our modern democractic secular western style of government is the only conceivable way to exist, is probably our most deeply embedded un-examined assumption.

It is what we hold sacred. It is our moral high ground. It is our religion. And it is unspeakable to question it.

To think it will remain as such is complete folly.

We are evolving towards something, and it sure as hell aint this.

 

[johnmatrix]

So if I start building a bunch of things and doing all things righteous, I have the moral right to demand money from others?

If I'm using the things you build then why shouldn't I have to pay for it?

Maybe I should gather a group of friends and start demanding money from each house in my neighborhood in return for our virtuous endeavors like protection & our scrumptious cupcakes, oh wait, that's called a mafia.

If the houses use your water mains, sewage pipes, power lines, phone lines, roads etc then why shouldn't you be demanding money? It ain't free!


Yeah and mafias demanding protection money would completely disappear in an anarchist society. Keep dreaming!

Mafioso: "We want 25% of everything you earn starting today."
Anarchist: "C'mon guys, embrace the non-aggression principle!"
Mafioso: "Fuck yourself, Timmy two-shoes, chop this guys pinkie off."

 

[scottspfd82]

If I'm using the things you build then why shouldn't I have to pay for it?

You should. But you shouldn't be forced to use and pay for anything I build.

If the houses use your water mains, sewage pipes, power lines, phone lines, roads etc then why shouldn't you be demanding money? It ain't free!

No one is debating paying for any services that you use.

Yeah and mafias demanding protection money would completely disappear in an anarchist society. Keep dreaming!

Mafioso: "We want 25% of everything you earn starting today."
Anarchist: "C'mon guys, embrace the non-aggression principle!"
Mafioso: "Fuck yourself, Timmy two-shoes, chop this guys pinkie off."

Maybe not.

No one's saying it'd be a non-violent utopia.

Non-aggression doesn't mean you can't act in self-defense. I'd have no problem killing Timmy for initiating violence against me on my property.

And when you think about the Mafia, where have they gained power throughout history? Through exploiting opportunities that arise because of prohibition.

Capone wouldn't have had the opportunities he had without prohibition.

Coke wouldn't be worth ~$100 a gram on the street, and people wouldn't be killing each other over it if it was legal.

 

[johnmatrix]

You should. But you shouldn't be forced to use and pay for anything I build.

Presumably you, guerilla, dreamache and anyone else here touting the same beliefs willingly purchased or rent properties supplied by state services like water and sewage lines. Then you're complaining when you're forced to pay for it?

I do see what you're saying though, for example why do you have to pay for the swings in the park that other people's children get to use, when you don't have any yourself? Can you imagine how insanely complicated and impractical it would be to figure out exactly what 200 million people individually use, and charge them accordingly?

Coke wouldn't be worth ~$100 a gram on the street, and people wouldn't be killing each other over it if it was legal.

People kill people to steal their shoes in the US. Not sure about you but I've never witnessed a drug murder, I've never witnessed any murder in fact. Australia is pretty peaceful. A rare thing happened recently where a woman was raped and murdered. This was the result:

 

[REIMktg]

And when you think about the Mafia, where have they gained power throughout history? Through exploiting opportunities that arise because of prohibition.

Mafia type organizations are simply what you could think of as "organized crime". Seems from reading they sprouted up in Sicily due to a lack of effectiveness of private police forces...but that's just Wikipedia, hard to know if its accurate. Accurate or not - there is nothing within AnCap that is convincing that these types of organizations will not exist.

The question is would it be worse under Anarchy than it is now? Hard to say, but I would hate to have to outbid an international criminal organization for the loyalty of my mercenaries (Private Police).

 

[scottspfd82]

Presumably you, guerilla, dreamache and anyone else here touting the same beliefs willingly purchased or rent properties supplied by state services like water and sewage lines. Then you're complaining when you're forced to pay for it?

There's a lot of privately owned water and power here. It's not always state controlled (usually is). That's not what I'm complaining about though.

If I stop paying for water or power I don't get any. Fair enough.

I do see what you're saying though, for example why do you have to pay for the swings in the park that other people's children get to use, when you don't have any yourself? Can you imagine how insanely complicated and impractical it would be to figure out exactly what 200 million people individually use, and charge them accordingly?

5 billion people own cell phones.

I pay for mine. I voluntarily signed a contract. I stop paying, they stop providing a service. No one is going to kick my door in and shoot me or throw me in prison for refusing to buy cellphone service (yet).

People kill people to steal their shoes in the US. Not sure about you but I've never witnessed a drug murder, I've never witnessed any murder in fact. Australia is pretty peaceful. A rare thing happened recently where a woman was raped and murdered. This was the result:

The only time I've witnessed murder was in Iraq.

I actually served with a lot of Australian guys. I've had overwhelmingly positive experiences with Aussies. Some of my closest biz partners and best clients are Australian. Usually a wicked sense of humor and insanely cool to work with.

But that's irrelevant here.

Just because a lot of the violence initiated by the state doesn't happen in front of you doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

I don't worry about being killed when walking down the street. Sure, it could happen. But my fear of it is zero compared with my fear of Government.

State's murder on a daily basis, and many of the victims aren't even guilty of owning shoes to steal.

 

[dreamache]

johnmatrix, supernova, you both seem to be stuck on the same page of believing that in order to be an anarchist/anarcho-capitalist/voluntaryist/etc., you have to immediately start living it full scale, without any regard to your current environment or situation; which I find is twisted logic.

yes, I enjoy my life, and I use the roads and other public services. But I use them and live here, knowing there is definitely a better way. So instead of packing up, taking my wife and my 2 month old/3 year old toddler, moving away from our families, and living in the woods as mountain people; I'll stick it out here and hope that along with myself, there are countless others who, instead of running away, can do what we can by raising our children and enlightening others about the inherently evil nature of the state.

 

[REIMktg]

I don't worry about being killed when walking down the street. Sure, it could happen. But my fear of it is zero compared with my fear of Government.

Really think on this. Why do you feel safe? Because the Govt has a lid on behavior. Because a lot of bad guys are locked up for life. What if the govt had not done that for you already? What if there was no threat of force on even the marginal amongst them?

I can only imagine the safe worlds so many live in within their minds and yet have no idea how much blood has been spilled on their behalf by law enforcement and armies. Your argument for how you feel where you are is irrelevant because Men before you have laid down there lives for your security. Does everyone around here think this is by chance?

Any security you feel is not by chance, it is by force or the threat of force. Period.

How is this such a foreign concept? Think.

 

[johnmatrix]

There's a lot of privately owned water and power here. It's not always state controlled (usually is). That's not what I'm complaining about though.

Oh yeah all the power companies here are private, but the infrastructure is built and maintained by the state, of course outsourced to private contractors. The companies are then free to compete on the infrastructure, allowing people to get the lowest price possible or change providers as they see fit.

Another example, the Australian government is building a fibre optic network to every house in Australia at the moment, then opening it up to the free market to compete. No private company is willing to fork out the $40 billion investment it takes to build it. Maybe a wireless network would be cheaper, but private companies have tried this and have gone broke. I know the rebuttal to this is the free market will build it when it becomes viable, that could be 20 years away for all we know. We've had stale technology in internet access for long enough, the state has decided to step in and bring us into the future finally.

I know, it's not about the above, it's the moral issue of violent theft of money by the state.

5 billion people own cell phones.

Tracking digital use is far easier than figuring out who spends time in the park more often, or who drives the farthest distances on the roads or who flushes the most deuces into the sewer system. No matter what, you're going to be subsidising someone else's use of a system, or being subsidised by others. There are microcosms of socialism in every service you pay for.

If I pay $50 a month for unlimited cellphone calls and use it 10 hours a day, you might be paying the same but using it for 30 minutes a day, allowing me to pay $50 instead of $300. States basically scale this up to provide mass services to a population that would otherwise be near impossible to manage with individual contracts.

I pay for mine. I voluntarily signed a contract. I stop paying, they stop providing a service. No one is going to kick my door in and shoot me or throw me in prison for refusing to buy cellphone service (yet).

I understand, but reality isn't like that. You might get a letter saying you owe tax, you might be summoned to court. Your door isn't going to be kicked in and you're not going to be shot. Sure it might end in jail if you don't pay up, but it's nothing but hyperbole to describe it as you did.

The problem is if the government doesn't have punishment for tax evasion, it's unfair to the people that do pay. Folks don't pay, infrastructure begins to crumble, businesses are no longer able to operate effectively and society collapses.

I actually served with a lot of Australian guys. I've had overwhelmingly positive experiences with Aussies. Some of my closest biz partners and best clients are Australian. Usually a wicked sense of humor and insanely cool to work with.

That's good to hear. I'm happy to admit that I can be an asshole on here sometimes. It's nice arguing with somebody who doesn't attempt to demean you in every sentence.

 

[scottspfd82]

Really think on this. Why do you feel safe? Because the Govt has a lid on behavior. Because a lot of bad guys are locked up for life. What if the govt had not done that for you already? What if there was no threat of force on even the marginal amongst them?

There would always be a threat of force against violent offenders. The Government isn't necessary for that.

I can only imagine the safe worlds so many live in within their minds and yet have no idea how much blood has been spilled on their behalf by law enforcement and armies. Your argument for how you feel where you are is irrelevant because Men before you have laid down there lives for your security. Does everyone around here think this is by chance?

I've been in combat. I've watched close friends die for "security". I occasionally wake up in excruciating pain, and have for the better part of a decade because of injuries that I sustained overseas.

Do you really think that you're any safer today than you were before we started the war on terrorism?

We have the largets per capita prison population on the planet. Over 60% of prisoners are for non-violent offenses. Over 50% of prisons are for profit - funded by taxpayer dollars yet earning a profit for the companies that own them.

You REALLY think this is for your safety? It's not.

Any security you feel is not by chance, it is by force or the threat of force. Period.

How is this such a foreign concept? Think.

If someone kicks in my door to kill/rape/rob me right now, who's more likely to defend me? Myself or the police?

The police have no legal obligation to defend anyone.

Any would-be violent criminal will be much more deterred by knowing they may be killed by someone defending themselves than by the police magically showing up while a crime is in progress to prevent it.

 

[guerilla]

Really think on this. Why do you feel safe? Because the Govt has a lid on behavior. Because a lot of bad guys are locked up for life. What if the govt had not done that for you already?

This is a fallacy. Where I live, we have 3 cops who stop working at 5:00 on weekdays. If we need a police officer, we have to call for one to come from an hour away. And those 3 cops are actually 20 mins away from me.

People aren't dangerous because they generally aren't.

Consider, the rest of the world is not like America. 6.7 billion people don't live like Americans.

Really try to wrap your head around that.

The drug war alone creates a massive incentive for crime. Then you have the welfare system, which also encourages criminal behavior, broken homes etc. Both are government programs.

The policeman has to make sure there is always some crime, otherwise no one will need his services. That's why the biggest anti-pot special interests are the police and the prison system. They both lose a ton of money and power if pot is legalized.

That's how gov't works.

What if there was no threat of force on even the marginal amongst them?

Private citizens could use force if attacked. Through most of history, law enforcement was handled locally. Particularly in common law and sharia countries.

Your argument for how you feel where you are is irrelevant because Men before you have laid down there lives for your security.

If they weren't his agents, then they weren't acting for his security. By your rationale, we owe every human being who came before us for their "sacrifices". It's rubbish, and an argument based on guilt.

Btw, isn't Scott in the military or was in the military? If so, and if we follow your argument, you owe him.

Any security you feel is not by chance, it is by force or the threat of force. Period.

Lots of security comes from good relations, education, intelligence, morals, values, culture, property rights, negotiation etc.

Only a Phillistine argues that civilization is created with force. Mind you, that is what you actually believe and what I have been trying to get you to admit for 3 weeks.

I am happy you are out in the open now.

 

[guerilla]

The police have no legal obligation to defend anyone.

And they know it.

That's why they show up 20 minutes later.

 

[guerilla]

If I'm using the things you build then why shouldn't I have to pay for it?

What you don't address in your response, it that I stole the money from you to build it, and then I use it as a justification to force you to pay for it again and again.

It's not a very good argument because your premise is flawed.

Government has no wealth on its own. It gets wealth by taking it from private individuals under the threat of violence.

You guys just keep reaching for arbitrary justifications that aren't hard for me or anyone else to knock down. Surely you can do better?

 

[productionhead]

The government prints the money, numbnuts

 

[REIMktg]

There would always be a threat of force against violent offenders. The Government isn't necessary for that.

But under what authority? Local rules? Who makes those rules? Everyone just "agrees"? What about non-violent offenses? What do you do with " 'out' laws' "? Lock 'em up? Under what authority? Punish them in some way? Who makes the rules? Everyone just "agrees"? Can't wait until all the property owners want Capital Punishment for a variety of crimes as a deterrent and to save money from locking them up. Seems to me the ones locked up will probably be required to pay for their release, after all what reasonable person wants to pay for it and "Bam!" - debtors prisons. Sounds like good stuff. Heaven forbid you make a mistake in life, owe money, and then end up their. Wheres the redress? Where's the due process? What property owners would agree to lengthy court examination and court appointed lawyers - why pay for an " 'out' law "?

I've been in combat. I've watched close friends die for "security". I occasionally wake up in excruciating pain, and have for the better part of a decade because of injuries that I sustained overseas.

I appreciate your service and even though I rarely agree with battlefield tactics that put soldiers unnecessarily in the way of harm, I do appreciate the service.

Do you really think that you're any safer today than you were before we started the war on terrorism?

Yes. State's know there is a price for sponsoring terror and therefore the terrorists are likely to get less support and terrorist leaders themselves think twice before taking action. The actions taken may not be ideal, but they were instrumental in thwarting further devastating attacks. The last one is estimated to have hit the economy by $3 Trillion. How much would the next one have cost? $6 trillion?

We have the largets per capita prison population on the planet. Over 60% of prisoners are for non-violent offenses. Over 50% of prisons are for profit - funded by taxpayer dollars yet earning a profit for the companies that own them.
You REALLY think this is for your safety? It's not.

Some is, some is not for our safety. No one here is arguing the current implementation of the system is perfect. I am not a supporter of non-violent incarceration, but then again I am not a fan of plea deals with the violent that understate the violent prisoner population.

If someone kicks in my door to kill/rape/rob me right now, who's more likely to defend me? Myself or the police?
The police have no legal obligation to defend anyone.
Any would-be violent criminal will be much more deterred by knowing they may be killed by someone defending themselves than by the police magically showing up while a crime is in progress to prevent it.

Fair enough. I am for gun ownership. The problem is what to do with the opportunist thief that is not violent, this time. A little jail time? Ask anyone that has been to prison and see what they say about their fellow inmates. Many would be fine on the outside, but many more are planning their next crimes, have no remorse, and society is better off having them pulled out. Let's release all of the violent offenders and see if the prisons are servings society for the better.

We may not agree with Govt as it stands, but it is a system that can be changed, should you be able to garner public opinion to your side. If the politicians were not afraid of the people, they wouldn't spend so much money and time swaying public opinion.

 

[guerilla]

That our modern democractic secular western style of government is the only conceivable way to exist, is probably our most deeply embedded un-examined assumption.

It is what we hold sacred. It is our moral high ground. It is our religion. And it is unspeakable to question it.

Yup.

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

 

[scottspfd82]

Oh yeah all the power companies here are private, but the infrastructure is built and maintained by the state, of course outsourced to private contractors. The companies are then free to compete on the infrastructure, allowing people to get the lowest price possible or change providers as they see fit.

You really think that's free competition? That there's no incentives provided by the state - or back-room deals for preferential treatment from private companies going on?

Humans are capable of creating the same infrastructure without the state.

Another example, the Australian government is building a fibre optic network to every house in Australia at the moment, then opening it up to the free market to compete. No private company is willing to fork out the $40 billion investment it takes to build it. Maybe a wireless network would be cheaper, but private companies have tried this and have gone broke. I know the rebuttal to this is the free market will build it when it becomes viable, that could be 20 years away for all we know. We've had stale technology in internet access for long enough, the state has decided to step in and bring us into the future finally.

You can't know what a free market would do, because you've never experienced one. We haven't either.

I know, it's not about the above, it's the moral issue of violent theft of money by the state.

That and the monopoly on the (ab)use of violence by the state. If you lived in the US would you be proud to support what we do around the world? Australia isn't on the same scale, but they still participate.

Tracking digital use is far easier than figuring out who spends time in the park more often, or who drives the farthest distances on the roads or who flushes the most deuces into the sewer system. No matter what, you're going to be subsidising someone else's use of a system, or being subsidised by others. There are microcosms of socialism in every service you pay for.

That's part of doing business as long as it's voluntary.

If I pay $50 a month for unlimited cellphone calls and use it 10 hours a day, you might be paying the same but using it for 30 minutes a day, allowing me to pay $50 instead of $300. States basically scale this up to provide mass services to a population that would otherwise be near impossible to manage with individual contracts.

My cell phone company doesn't take my money by force.

I understand, but reality isn't like that. You might get a letter saying you owe tax, you might be summoned to court. Your door isn't going to be kicked in and you're not going to be shot. Sure it might end in jail if you don't pay up, but it's nothing but hyperbole to describe it as you did.

This happens daily.

This is less than an hour from my house.

Seriously. Watch it. There are kids present. They fired off six shots, killed the dogs and could have easily killed an innocent child...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdip3ypW6Kk]Police Raid Family Home in Columbia MO Kill Dog Pit Bull Shoot - YouTube[/ame]

This was based on an "anonymous tip". And the amount of pot they found was a $300 fine. This EXACT thing happens 150+ per day in the US.

No hyperbole here. If anything I'm very much understating the facts.

The problem is if the government doesn't have punishment for tax evasion, it's unfair to the people that do pay. Folks don't pay, infrastructure begins to crumble, businesses are no longer able to operate effectively and society collapses.

That's where we disagree.

Humans are perfectly capable of building infrastructure. I don't want to be forced through violence to support kill lists, raiding and shooting innocent people or murdering thousands overseas.

That's good to hear. I'm happy to admit that I can be an asshole on here sometimes. It's nice arguing with somebody who doesn't attempt to demean you in every sentence.

I completely understand your viewpoint. Believe me, most of my close family and friends are very hardcore statists. I'm not going to judge someone personally because of their beliefs.

Attacking you for your views, which are understandable given the world we live in and how your beliefs are structured would be counter-productive.

Many of the people that I care about the most in this world share your views in a way.

I'm not even trying to change your views. That's not my goal. I value my time highly. My only agenda here is that hopefully someone reading one of these posts may see a new idea - and that idea spreads - so that 30 years from now my kids will live in a safer world.

I have no room to judge anyone's beliefs. I've only recently begun to open my eyes to this stuff myself. I'm just trying to get people to think. I think about your points too. I appreciate the conversation. I think that on some level we all learn from it.

 

[Kiopa_Matt]

We're not even proposing bloodshed. Just the freedom to be left alone.

Then quit bitching, and go do it. There's over 9 million square kms of land in Canada, and only 35 million people. Guaranteed if you decided to stake a few kms out for yourself, away from all government funded infrastructure and services, they're going to leave you alone. They probably won't even know you exist, and even if they do, aren't about to send a cop out on a horse or skidoo to collect taxes.

Besides, you probably couldn't live where you are without the government anyway. For example, are you and your neighbors going to foot the bill for the explosive charges set off every year in the mountains, to ensure your house doesn't get plowed over by an avalanche? I could be wrong, but I would imagine a good chunk of that is funded by tax payer revenue generated in cities like Calgary or Vancouver (not sure what province you're in). Or are you and your 5 neighbors going to foot the $60k/year bill for that?

Which people? Why do they get to write the rules? Why can't I write the rules?

Then go for it, if you want to. You have to get the consensus of your community to do so though via a vote, but you're more than capable of doing it. Run for mayor, then maybe MP, then Premier, and hell, maybe even Prime Minister later on.

 

[scottspfd82]

Then quit bitching, and go do it.

You're telling him to "leave" in order to be free? He can't be free where he is now?

What gives you the right to tell him what to do? He's not forcing you to read his posts.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXlMFWmotSU]The Little Government that Could - YouTube[/ame]

Seriously, why the hostility?

P.S. Another Aussie that I like ^^^.