Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-02-2013, 08:44 PM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
Your argument would have merit if we were to suddenly abolish government in one area of the world say, tomorrow at noon. However, that isn't what myself or any other rational anarchists are agitating for.

The transition toward stateless societies is a multi-generational process that will only occur once a plurality of human beings are non-violent. Once that happens, the state will simply no longer be needed and thus, it will vanish. Human violence is and has been on the decline for as long as we can find evidence to study and that trend shows no signs of changing its trajectory in the future. On the contrary, as more parents choose peaceful and rational means of parenting, the world will continue to be populated by people who're less and less superstitious and less inclined toward violence. And once the peaceful population reaches the tipping point, the threats you're talking about will be in the minority and thus, won't require the sort of standing armies that are required today. Although, it isn't hard to argue that the number of military personnel the US employs at present is far more than should be needed, even by today's standard.

If you're interested, you can read Steven Pinker's, The Better Angels of Our Nature or you can visit The Association for Psychohistory's website and read about 40 years worth of research papers on the psychological genesis of human violence.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 02:49 AM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
(07-02-2013 12:09 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  Yet another benefit of a free society is that there is no reason to attack it. With no tax base to pillage and no populace that's used to being ruled, there's not much booty to be gained. Moreover, there's no reason whatever to retaliate against a society that doesn't restrict trade, doesn't restrict immigration (which is actually just the act of moving), etc. Think of Switzerland and how many times they've been attacked.
Really interesting thought. How did that idea work out for the American Indians who pretty much had no tax base and a population unacustomed to centralized government?


Quote:As for who would manage this force and who would make the decisions.... a
consortium of insurance companies is a likely candidate since defense
is essentially an insurance. Of course, that's not to say that only
insurance companies could manage the force. Any willing group of
qualified individuals could be charged with that task.
Oh my...a Corporate Military run by the Insurance Companies (i.e., Banks). Can we call them "Death Incorporated"? Sure...let's give the banks the right to force - for they have done such great things after we gave them the power to create money!

Let's get real, man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 05:31 AM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
Any dreams or Ideals I had about the world improving left when the occupy movement went home.

In its basic form my ideal system would be a communist system that is fully regulated by the people. To stop any "fraudulent" activity at the top I would remove the "awards" for such actions. Which means that everybody in the world would be limited to how much money they can actually ever possess, seeing as in my world everybody would be entitled to everything equally then money wouldnt actually be needed that much anyway.

"You cant just limit the amount of money people make"

I hear you cry? Why not? There are billionaires all over this world and whilst some may have made their fortune this lifetime a lot of money is simply passed on generation to generation. Money that these people will probably have no chance of spending in their lifetimes, that could be being used elsewhere. There has been a load of billionaires who have "pledged" to give their fortunes away, very recently Richard Branson pledged

"What happens to all the money that you earn after you reach your limit"

It is put back into the system, the very system that supports you, your family, your children and your friends. Instead of societies "Idols" being bullshit celebrities who are only in the news for how much money they have and how they live that lifestyle the new "Idols" will be the people who contribute selflessly into the system and what they achieve by doing so.

Money makes this world go around... it needs to change, or we never will.

"The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lifes, we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity"




For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 10:44 AM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
"Really interesting thought. How did that idea work out for the American
Indians who pretty much had no tax base and a population unacustomed to
centralized government?"


About as good as the welfare state has worked out for the poor, whose "reservations" are the dilapidated areas of inner cities where police seldom go, property tax money rarely gets spent and jobs have become all but a thing of the distant past.

"Oh my...a Corporate Military run by the Insurance Companies (i.e.,
Banks). Can we call them "Death Incorporated"? Sure...let's give the
banks the right to force - for they have done such great things after we
gave them the power to create money!"

Corporations are legal fictions created by the state for the purpose of shielding the rich from liability. They couldn't exist in a free society. Additionally, no one gets the right to force in a free society. Currency could be printed by anyone who could show that that their currency is stable and valuable. And, who's this we you speak of? I never have given my blessing to the idea of giving a monopoly on the production of fiat currency to one small private banking cartel. That was done by the people you call your government. The same people you think will protect you from evil have sold you and your children into debt slavery for political fame and fortune in the here and now. Those same people who make it against the law for a poor, uneducated person to enter a voluntary agreement of employment, thereby ensuring that they will remain wards of the state for generation after generation.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 10:54 AM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
"Any dreams or Ideals I had about the world improving left when the occupy movement went home."

How did you think the Occupy movement would be able to improve anything by leveraging the guns of the state? You can't end the predations of the banking industry by appealing to the very people who made their predations legal in the first place. You'd just as soon ask one wolf in a pack to convince the other four not to eat you.

"Money makes this world go around... it needs to change, or we never will."


Not at all. Money is inanimate. Money can be paper or it can be metal or it can be chickens or it can be labor. Money doesn't do anything. It is a tool created by humans. It is humans that must change.

If I have a hammer, I can hit you over the head with it or build you a house with it. If I choose the former, do you vilify the tool?

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 01:59 PM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
Society places more value over money than life itself... so it does make the world go around but in a very damaging way.

We need to change society by making the priorities of life something more than defining success by the amount of digits or paper we have next to our names.. which at the minute is limitless.

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 02:16 PM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
(25-02-2013 05:31 AM)bemore Wrote:  Any dreams or Ideals I had about the world improving left when the occupy movement went home.

Isn't that the one where a group of assholes decided to take a camping trip to NYC?

You can't really successfully oppose terrorist organizations, with groups of people deciding to take their first camping trips.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 02:18 PM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
(25-02-2013 02:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(25-02-2013 05:31 AM)bemore Wrote:  Any dreams or Ideals I had about the world improving left when the occupy movement went home.

Isn't that the one where a group of assholes decided to take a camping trip to NYC?

You can't really successfully oppose terrorist organizations, with groups of people deciding to take their first camping trips.
You never actually went to any occupy meetings yourself then I take it?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 02:35 PM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
"Society places more value over money than life itself... so it does make the world go around but in a very damaging way."

Logical contradiction is illogical. If society invents money, then money can't control society. Oh and, God makes the world go around, silly. Laugh out load

"We need to change society by making the priorities of life something
more than defining success by the amount of digits or paper we have next
to our names.. which at the minute is limitless."


Agreed. And you can't do that by pointing guns at people.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2013, 04:43 PM
RE: Anarchism or Statism? A Voluntarist's Perspective
(25-02-2013 02:18 PM)bemore Wrote:  
(25-02-2013 02:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Isn't that the one where a group of assholes decided to take a camping trip to NYC?

You can't really successfully oppose terrorist organizations, with groups of people deciding to take their first camping trips.

You never actually went to any occupy meetings yourself then I take it?

I was turned off from the movement, at the beginning; or at least, at the beginning of the media covering people, and hearing backers and protesters, views and opinions.

So, the meetings were good?

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: