Thanks for the recommendation!
Let's see if it changes my skepticism... ☺️
🫂
There’s a great book on the subject if you’re curious how a free society could function and sustain. It addresses all the common questions:
* Who will build the roads
* How would we have national defense without them turning and taking us over
* How would violent and non-violent crime be handled
* How would we avoid the tragedy of the commons
It blew my mind when I first read it. I changed from a reluctant minarchist to proud ancap.
https://freedomain.com/freedomain_books/practical-anarchy/full-text/
Discussion
Btw, I'm not implying Anarchy wouldn't work, I'm saying that people wouldn't not want it massively.
People want to delegate things, don't want to do everything by themselves, too much hassle. It's 'easier' to delegate them.
🫂
Would love to hear your thoughts if/when you read it!
This sounds like a false dichotomy, why is abolishing the state at odds with delegating things? I’m a software engineer, at my job the CTO delegates work to my manager who delegates work to me. They don’t threaten or bully me, they pay me voluntarily and in return I work voluntarily. We might be talking past each other due to differing definitions, but to me that’s anarchy. Rules without rulers, and un-coerced spontaneous self-organization.
I was referring to delegatig 'decision taking'.
I think (some) people prefer to obey other people. They don't want to take decisions and assume the consequences.
That's where a ruler comes appealing: there's someone to blame when things turn bad.
"Anarchy is such intense! Having to assume the consequences of every decision is not worth it."
That's not my personal sentiment, but I'm afraid a lot of people would be like that.
🫂
You still haven't explained how this is relevant to whether anarchy will succeed. Is forced integration a given with you?
You can force authoritarism, but you can't force anarchism.
🫂
Anarcho-capitalism is about bringing force back to its proper use. We absolutely can and will force anarchism onto ourselves. That is, forcibly get everyone else to stop forcing us to do things.
And anyone who decides they want to join that paradigm, the government does not have complete ultimate power over them. The freedom to vote with your feet is still a realistic option for some. They have a choice to make.
And further, anarchists have the right to physically remove people and systems that tend toward statism, crime, or consolidation of power, and they will use it. And still again, cooperation in a free market is so superior to state regulated markets, that entire decentralized stateless regions will tend to have sustainable economic advantages against the statist world, and will drive motivated individuals to join the prosperity.
So I'm afraid your intuition is lacking in details about this stuff.
"anarchists have the right to *physically remove people* and systems that tend toward statism, crime, or consolidation of power, and they will use it."
This is authoritarism, mate. This is consolidation of power by itself.
Oh, the irony...
🫂
If you believe that defense of property is authoritarianism, then you can just fuck off with that hug emoji.
Who's talking about property?
It's getting pretty tired to talk with you when you imagine what I'm saying to fit your discourse.
The cool thing about anarchy is that it doesn't need to be adopted on a wide scale to succeed. It simply works with just one individual making the choice to have no one rule over them. People who are completely free come by their freedom the hardest, because they are also quite aware of the price of freedom which is self-responsibility.
Agree.
And that's why I say that many people don't wanting responsibility implies they prefer someone ruling them.
And that why I don't see Anarchy as a State replacement working out.
Lolwhat it's already working
As a State replacement?
May I ask where in the world?
Once again... the individual.
Bye.
Once again, the original discussion was about anarchy replacing the State.
But keep diverting it if you are looking for attention.
Where two gather, there is an anarchist community. Where 1000 gather, there is an anarchist town. We see these already popping up. Do you really think people are always going to be evenly distributed?
Look, I think anarchy is good and have a lot of benefits in local and distributed communities.
I just don't see how it can replace completely a State over millions of individuals.
🫂