A practical problem for the Anarchist and New Age Voluntarists (and any other starry-eyed idealist). (featuring @vuyusile as author)

in #anarchy8 years ago (edited)

I am relatively new to steemit and am learning a lot about the community.

I have been introduced to concepts known as whales and sharks and dolphins and minnows and even insects. Even though I have made great strides in under a week, I haven’t found a sensible explanation for “vests” and a host of other geeky terms and titles, yet. But no matter – I will catch on in due course. Thanks for this opportunity!

I am also observing some things about the community’s culture. Or perhaps more accurately some of its sub-cultures.

I haven’t figured out where to find the stats that I see some have access to – yet; and I am not sure that the data will produce the stat that will give objectivity to my next observation, but it does seem to me, subjectively, that we have a high concentration of Anarchists and New Age Voluntarists.

Anarchists no doubt have the ringing endorsement of @dollarvigilante to thank for their concentration. I watched his interview with Dan and Ned as part of my induction: “I can see no reason why any person should not be blogging on Steem” still rings in my ears as an early mantra. The spike in membership that followed his first day success is already the stuff of legend.

I am not sure where the Voluntarists pull their recruiting power from, though accept that both anarchists and voluntarists endorse the politics behind the idea of a non-state-regulated cryptocurrency.

I wholly endorse the idea of voluntarism.

From where I am sitting much of the more valuable and enduring stuff that gets done in the world emanates from those who are not compelled to do it. Like loving and caring for your family; like pursuing an occupation with a sense of calling; like placing your abilities and time on the altar of sacrifice for others’ progress. But these people don’t usually make a point of seeking the label. something enforces the unenforceable. They seem to move on with an admirable obliviousness in sun, shine and rain. I digress slightly.

The truth is I don’t know much about the practical politics of either Anarchists or Voluntarists.

Of course I can, and have, read up a little on them, but in my part of the world they seem an endangered species – if they ever were introduced. They seem to grow up, counterintuitively, in societies that already have a great deal of freedom relative to the rest of the world. But I would like to know more.

So I thought I would pose a practical problem and invite members of these schools of thought to educate me. I am asking for real life solutions to the real life problem.

Not, if you will forgive the impertinence, the sycophantish reflections of one’s own sense of self image and ideology; but rather actual social and political strategy that might address the problem. And please don’t misinterpret my preemptive attempt to filter useful comments from the useless ones – a recent conspectus of responses to some articles has convinced me that flattering the powerful is a strategy that will not have been screened out as people signed up for this platform; and every whale likes to have his tummy rubbed; this is, after all, a popularity contest, and the popular may vote up their accolytes. So I get that steemit will be as vulnerable to the “mirror, mirror on the wall” syndrome as any other social media. I am not hating on this, just trying to limit the reach of its infection.

I am genuinely and seriously open to persuasion that this project can be more than a boomer for the early adopters.

I am asking all of you out there, including, for example, @dantheman who recently received a chorus of approval for his personal introspection in https://steemit.com/philosophy/@dantheman/why-do-we-fight-to-change-the-worldand his adoption of Eckhart Tolle’s philosophy. I am calling on those who have the messianic vision in their eyes, to propose solutions to the following problem.

On 2 September 2016 in the gloriously beautiful South Africa, filled with people of great resillience, the Minister of Police presented his annual report on the crime statistics for the country.

Four crucial stats are headlined in the below infographic. Its too #@%$!! awful for words.

An average of 51 people are murdered each day (18673 for the year).
An average of 40 hijackings take place each day.
20 820 home robberies (that is a theft involving violence against the possessor of the thing being stolen) and 250 606 home burglaries occurred in the past 12 months.

That does not even include the rape statistic which is one in three women (lets ignore men for the moment); or the assault statistic, which is heavily gender biased against women.

It does not include those incidents that go unreported.

And of course I don’t suggest that South Africa is the only State that suffers from this kind of problem.

So how would the glorious revolution march forward on the shoulders of anachism and voluntarism in the absence of state coercion, and arrest this state of affairs and bring substantive liberty and equality to all those that live as both victims and perpetrators of the violence represented in these statistics?

Let’s get past the ranting against state controlled central banks and show how this project would solve this problem. Let’s see how the economic underpinnings of the unregulated currency translate into actual socio-political interventions that turn the tide. Let’s not have any platitudes that these stats represent the failure of the state (which of course they do) but rather how this project, even at its apirational best, holds the key to unlocking glorious liberty and shining equality.

You have a disciple waiting to be made …

Or if you doubt my sincerity, lets treat it as a problem that directs our thinking to the next generation of utility for the program; something that takes us beyond the banality of blogging.

Sort:  

I really appriciate your inquisitive mind. Seek and ye shall find. I have an entire series of articles that outline very real solutions to everything you have listed above.

What is often overlooked is that the vast majority of real crime comes from side effects of government (drug laws, etc). More money is stolen by government asset forfeitures (not taxes) than all private thefts combined.

Conclusion, absent taxes everyone could easily afford to pay for insurance that would completely replace the cost of stolen / damaged property. Insurance companies would have financial incentive to investigate for the sole purpose of preventing fraudulent claims.

Insurance companies would not insure anyone who they suspect of being guilty of theft or property damage until restitution is paid.

This would be incredibly affordable for the poor and middle class once you remove the huge burden of government and introduce free market competition.

With respect to murder you must realize that prison is not a deterrent. Loss of social standing and reputation in the economy is a far greater deterrent than prison. If government fails to prevent these things today, the only thing more government will do is increase the rate of violence.

The end result of government is financial irresponsibility leading to economic collapse.

Requiring perfection from voluntary societies is a double standard when you do not require perfection from statist societies.

In my humble opinion, governments kill more innocent people every year than all private murders combined.

I'm a big advocate of nonviolence. I was raised by two pacifist parents. I'm a conscientious objector with a lot of interest in the works of Ghandi, MLK, and others.

I tell you all this to point out I share your values even thought what I'm about to say might cause you to think I do not share your values.

Have you read Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker? He's gathered a ton of data that I think clearly demonstrates that governments throughout history of reduced violence, even though they use violence to do this.

Your response above about insurance is a very interesting idea. That being said, I think your response to violence is exceptionally inadequate. You basically didn't provide any useful suggestion about how to deal with the problem of violence in South Africa. You just give a nebulous argument about loss of social capital needing to force people to change their behavior, but you say nothing about how to put in place the mechanisms for this loss in social capital to come about in a society in which violence is currently not causing the necessary loss in social capital that is needed to get the violence to stop.

So, I ask you again, how would you go about reducing the violence in this very specific situation?

I am so grateful for the persons that take time to respond and engage. These sound like intriguing theoretical solutions but I struggle to allow them to displace my practical skepticism. Don't get me wrong - I am wholly open to doing it differently; the present system is working badly at many levels. I think we must find creative but viable alternatives.
The status quo only changes when it is sufficiently disrupted, and of course this is what is attractive about what you are doing with this site. When I lift my head from the process of blogging and remind myself that this platform is acquiring a life of its own and is much bigger than any single person's opinions, especially mine, then I see this project as a social disrupter that may create the space for change.
When that space opens up, what is the kind of change that we intend to innovate? How will the economic underpinnings of this platform shape the social mutation in the evolutionary process? I think these are the most interesting questions. Are we asking them?
Thanks for taking the time to engage with me.

Ultimately the platform will evolve to be like most platforms in the sense that those frequently monitoring will become more well known, and those who have status. Thus far I have little to no proactivity beyond discussion amongst the chosen few. I would assume this would prevent to some extent mass acceptance and uptake of the platform. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

Approx 250 million for the 20th century. Outside of war. Have you seen this Hawaii edu study of democide in the 20th century alone? This is the root, and it's an unsustainable problem.

Yes, people in lifestyles which require them to commit criminalized acts aren't worried about jail time. Maybe it is a big deterrent for what carries a 'life' sentence but circumstances of when and how crimes occur don't usually lend themself to 'thinking it over' and weighing pros and cons.

The justice system just becomes another obstacle in the same sense as a locked door, security cameras, lack of money or drugs, etc.

Ain't that the truth.

Checkin' out your article now.

There is a huge social standing cost in being sent to prison. It becomes more difficult to find a job and you are always labeled after that. Reputation doesn't mean to everyone what it means to yourself. You can't see the world through a mirror.

I consider myself a voluntaryist and I truly live by these principles moment to moment. My humble ideas on the problem of bad actors in society...

  • You can only change what you can control, and most of the time it is only your own actions. Therefore, live the principles you believe in and set an example among others that is above reproach. This shows self-discipline and awareness.
  • Bad actors thrive where vulnerabilities exist and this is the toughest area of concern when considering change. In a world where we didn't rely on state sponsored services, we would have better communication in communities. This would in a way, push the need for community based solutions on issues that arise. If there was better communication and connectivity about services needed in the community, probable solutions would arise where people would be responsible for certain tasks and would be compensated by the people that agreed to pay for the services. Hand shakes work better than arm twisting.
  • There would obviously be a time period of transition for communities and how they would choose to connect to surrounding communities. This would allow for competing ideas to function and co-exist. The best solutions would be passed onto the surrounding communities to try and adopt if they actually work. Different solutions will obviously work better in differing locations. But the key is the competition of ideas.

So you advocate an evolutionary model driven by the passive virtue of good actors. I like the primacy of choice in the marketplace of ideas. But is this an answer to the women in a poor community that are being preyed upon by a serial rapist? I still can't see how we dispense with law and enforcement; how these services can be located in anything other than in specialist actors; and how the guardians of the specialist actors can be appointed in any more successful means than a democratic process with separation of powers and the checks and balances that this offers.
What happens when those resourced communities that can afford private specialist actors succeed in establishing safety in a community, but simply drive the bad actors into disorganised communities thereby increasing their plague. What do we say to the person who cannot vote with his feet in those communities?

@vuyusile I so feel you, being from South Africa, hating banks and government control over my life, but wondering how on earth it would work in a country like ours, as well as other less developed countries. I have seen all the arguments, but feel that possibly anarchists don't understand about a society like ours? Fellow disciple-in-waiting.

I've read over what I have posted so far and I'm sure you think I'm just offering philosophy rather than real solutions.

That is true.....and admittedly I'm a thinker. Let me try to actually use the non-aggression principle to give a solution. As a precursor to my thoughts, I believe in the younger generation and think they can have a powerful voice in this conversation.

My Solution-

  • To the people who are wronged: They should act in their self-interest to protect themselves the best way they see possible. Self-defense should be a primary option. (Travel in groups, carry a weapon or equalizer of sorts)
  • In this particular situation without money, the affected group can act in solidarity within the community. Raising awareness by not just pointing out the bad acts, but by publicly shaming these acts and their unintended consequences. Effectively, teaching some in the process...which will lead to more joining the cause. The minority can find strength in voicing their opinions by standing together with proper timing.....I believe it can be effective. Martin Luther King, Jr. & Gandhi showed this to be beneficial.
  • Violence is a showing of insecurity and individual weakness, as the bad actor is unable to find the solution to their want using other means. This is where the true problem sits. Be smart, when a bad actor is found out.....don't just retaliate and act in the heat of a moment. Rather, use this awareness as a strength. If the option to punish or rehabilitate is on the table; this is where a true aim in justice is needed. Every situation may need to be different and these creative responses will be historical. All life is precious.
  • Empower the younger generation to harness the ideals of good morality, and to care for others as they might care for themselves. Also, give them the understanding of the totality or compounding nature of the problem. I believe this will lead them to take responsibility and ownership, which can massively shift positive attention toward probable community solutions beyond the steps I've thought of.

I wasn't necessarily offering a solution to this broad topic that reaches to every part of the earth. I was in a manor suggesting that a community without limitations could choose with discussions the best route(s) they see.

I can understand it feels helpless in some communities (ex. majority of men are causing problems for the women)....if the heavy hand of government law doesn't offer a solution, then what I'm asking you to think about is what do the wronged people do? The limitations are that people don't take on the problems themselves because they are hoping to rely on powers above....but what if we are the powers that need to solve the problem?

You have offered concrete steps at both a decentralised and centralised level; and much to ponder - which is more than some of the other replies. I wish that my steem power was not still so low so that I could vote up some of your and other comments. Tough being a newbie.;-)

Thanks for your feedback. Even when pushed to give solutions, I want to stress the importance of creative solutions by working together voluntarily. By no means do I think my worldview solves all the problems....but I have seen real value by living by these principles and I have faith in myself.

Start a thread seeing who would commit to giving up their comforts for the promise of change, and begin acquiring land resources, and financing. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

Model would not need to be scaled and moved, groupings should be decided by voluntary interests, and methodology chosen by symposium, I recommend football fields, since they have occupancy of 10 thousands. Likely cities would be early adopters, or your group needs to acquire large plots in a near area and expand as new members join. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

Very good conversation to have. These are truly horrifying statistics. I don't want to sound like I am coming from a place of knowing all the answers. Of course none of us really do know the answers. We are searching for the answers together. I, myself like to blame the financial system for all the woes in the world. I know that everything is connected and even after we evolve to a non-corrupt ledger such as crypto currencies, we will still have the human condition to work on. I don't think it's like an art work that we finish someday. I think we are evolving and it's awesome that we are part of this creative process.

Thanks! I share your perplexity ... and agree that much hardship for humans emanates from the corrupt economic systems; and that this corruption, regardless of the 'ism, starts with the human condition (although grant that some 'isms have a tendency to amplify human vice more than another). What vice-like features of the human condition are we feeding on this platform? what monsters are we creating?

Attention still is "popularity contest" big names getting read. I wouldn't assume creating monsters, but can look at the behavior so far, and tell the same problems we have with voting in elections are present here. Would luke a similar site where you didn't see poster name. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

So how would the glorious revolution march forward on the shoulders of anarchism and voluntarism in the absence of state coercion, and arrest this state of affairs and bring substantive liberty and equality to all those that live as both victims and perpetrators of the violence represented in these statistics?

Simple; there will be more wealth and prosperity, which means less stress and more charities.

People already are social, it's just that due to the pressure the government puts on the economy by taxing it so heavily that people are burdened. Take that burden away and society will simply function better.

Private groups will start all kinds of help organisations, just like you see happening here, take #robinhoodwhale for example.

Nobody forced those people to start a charity ... they did it anyway!

RobinHoodWhale doesn't lose any money for their "charity." He is literally helping people at... Well, I was going to say no cost but he's probably actually making Steem on the deal.

even better !!

think about it; profitable charities

how great is that !? there are going to be so many of them, think about all the people that will be supported.

But again, there is no cost. Real life doesn't work like that. We can't just magically hand everyone a yacht because it costs money to make a yacht.

I think you have presented the better argument.
Even with more wealth and prosperity, the problem remains one of distribution because capital circulates in pools that not everyone accesses. Of course everyone has theoretical access (its the dining at the Ritz point) but everyone isn't accessing as a fact. And that fact is due to a number of considerations not always within any player's control and both fair and unfair.
Take our involvement on this platform as a case in point. Early vs late adopters; featured vs unfeatured authors; shifting of goalposts because of rule changes, etc.
It remains a fascinating experiment in using rules to shape behaviour. As long as we don't forget that its rules are as limited as a Keynesian model. The real world is much more complicated with a host of influences that we haven't event begun to get a handle on.

More opportunitues would exist if communities for voting were smarter as barter, and hunan capital would enter the market as viable tender. One doesnt need to "own," the yacht, just have access. Consider the groupon model. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

The answer has been covered many times.... I like this one.


Things to note:
Paying for security would be a lower price than paying the Taxes most nations charge.
Security via multiple agencies would protect those who are not subscribers to a security agency do to the fact criminals do not know who is a subscriber.

A great system where only the rich can afford not to be raped and there's no chance of it forming a mafia!

The rich are bad, and the poor are good; is a far too common excuse for the need of government.
Why was the government forced to use "tax evasion" as the accusation to bring down the mafia?

Because the mafia has underlings to cover them on matters, since justice has, and needs, burden of proof. However, legalization of non violent criminal acts may create enough competition to destroy larger entities or influence their transition to considering themselves honest men. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

Not even remotely close to what I said.

The government was forced to use tax evasion because the mafia were smart about their crimes, getting underlings to do the work (and get caught all the time!) so the bosses could never be proven to have committed a crime. It's funny how our legal system actually wants proof of a crime before sending someone to prison. Do you think that would hold up as an ideal when you could get paid to send someone to prison?

You'r probably not reading me and Nathan Brown's discussion, so I have no idea what your point is. "Government is great because it finds ways to catch the bosses"?
"People would stop reviewing evidence because businesses are allowed to cut deals"?

Thank you - I took the time to listen to this video. Its an interesting idea. In South Africa, economic participators, like myself, are taxed at a marginal rate of 40%, and still have to contract for private security, health, education, etc because the state provision is so poor.
But have you considered how many debatable predicates there are to the success of the free market security provision in this proposal? Are you happy with the use of force in compulsion? how does that marry with some of the other tenets of the new age voluntarism I have been reading about on this platform?
What if the free market does not work in a particular location for example urban over rural, etc. What will be used in the transition period to get it working?
In the end, I think this is a decidedly poor answer to the question that has been posed. We will have to do better than this.

The opening question is under the assumption that high amounts of crime do occur. On land that does have a notable probability of crime, simple insurance business will not be capable of providing sufficient compensation, and may bankrupt themselves if they do not hire a protective force. I do not think such high crime areas are likely in a free system, but assuming they exist, this is a solid solution to the alternative.
No one would be required to enter areas managed by such businesses. But, for the people who do they could enter with confidence that competition and reputation maintenance would keep such businesses from framing them for crimes, or committing other wrong acts against them. Insurance alone would give people more reason to do nothing to stop theft, and would encourage staged activities to obtain payout.

So I see wholesale corruption in all levels of government; and this drives a great many vices that are visited on citizens. thats a given; and I don't need persuasion that government is weak and failing.
But I also see corruption and interest seeking in the private sphere that will break the market's invisible hand. A great deal more harm may be done while the market and market actors try to sort it out.
As much as I would like to believe, I have not been won over to this set of proposals.

Your "error," in assuming all things must be considered prior to implementation where agility would be most essential for progress. https://steemit.com/anarchy/@zev/a-practical-solution-for-the-anarchist-and-new-age-voluntarists

Only people with wealth will be able to pay for security. How are the poorest people in society going to be able to protect themselves?

I already said "Security via multiple agencies would protect those who are not subscribers to a security agency do to the fact criminals do not know who is a subscriber."
So your real question is "How are the poorest people in society going to be able to get 'justice' for the wrongs done to them?"

As a poor person who's parked car was hit, I would officially state: "I'm not looking for 'justice' I forgive them."

In the same way: I forgive people who think they need a "State" so they can get their precious "Justice" served and I can go bankrupt trying to pay for healthcare I will never get to use.

It is the people who look for "Justice" all the time, who become the rich snobs that want perfection from everyone they see.

One should not seek justice so much as one should seek solutions for impetus of crime on case by case basis. In that there is potential for innovations, which may be profitable.

I think I disagree with you on the effectiveness of deterrence from state intervention. My thinking on this is based on the book Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker. Have you heard of it? It is an amazing analysis of why violence has drastically declined throughout human history and state deterrence is a significant part of the decline by Pinker's analysis.

Violence could have declined because people are becoming better, or it could just be a desire to not get caught by cameras that are so cheap and planted everywhere by private entities. Caring for the poor is a nice gesture, but if you don't believe the average person will do all they can to help the poor; The only option you will be left with is to form a government that will care for the poor(Provide Justice). As a poor person, I can assure you that the organizations to help the poor are far less helpful than the individuals who help us out.

You are just making guesses about why people might be less violent. Guesses are not very helpful. Stephen Pinker goes into in depth scientific analysis via statistics to try and make the best determination of what has reduced violence. I think depending on science, rather than guesses, is a far better approach for decisions making.

As for your comment about caring people doing you to help you than the government as a poor person, are you poor enough to qualify for government assistance such as food stamps or section 8 housing?

I have numerous friends who are poor enough to qualify for government assistance, and my girlfriend depends on government assistance due to her disability. There is no way in hell that all the people who love and care about her could provide her with $12k a year to help her make ends meet, which is about how much she gets in government assistance for her disability.

"I have numerous friends who are poor enough to qualify for government assistance, and my girlfriend depends on government assistance due to her disability. " and that is why you love government so much. Because you love the things it can get for you/friends/family; over the option to have a true personal care for others.

The rich are bad, and the poor are good; is a far too common excuse for the need of government.

How do they protect themselves now?

By not having things to steal. Other than that, gang affiliations provide some feelings of security in the roughest areas.

I don't think the Rich are bad and the poor are good. I also agree the poor don't have great ways to protect themselves now either. I don't see how private security will do a better job for the poor than a functional state government.

If you think government does a better job than private security, then you must think private security bad when compared to government. So if security does worse of a job as a private organization than as a public government, what market sector would do a better job than government?

Let me put it to you this way; A private security car following me from work to the rest stop where I sleep, is a lot less threatening than a government car of any kind.

I'm not saying private security isn't effective for the person hiring the security firm. My point s that I don't think private security will help those who don't have the funds to hire them.

So how would the glorious revolution march forward on the shoulders of anachism and voluntarism in the absence of state coercion, and arrest this state of affairs and bring substantive liberty and equality to all those that live as both victims and perpetrators of the violence represented in these statistics?

Well, I don't endorse the Tinfoiled Vigilante but your enquiry is rather silly. All these statistics occured under state control, not under anarchy. You can safely say that these problems are created from a police state, not the other way around. It will be silly to assume that these things will be worse under a free state. In my book violence produces violence and the state is pretty darn violent.

You can safely say that these problems are created from a police state,

Only if you don't understand that correlation does not equal causation...

It would actually be silly to assume these things would not be worse under a free state. People don't magically get better, all the motivations that cause violence now will still be there. In fact, there would be more since without the threat of punishment violence becomes a great way to improve one's own standing!

You appear to be genuinely inquisitive and curious, both great traits we need more of. If I understand your question correctly, there is no single answer or response that would cover the practical results of applying tools like steemit in making society better.

Since you already seem to be convinced The State is a major cause of a large number of problems that restrict freedom and thwart individual's ability to do well and actually thrive, what you appear to lack is an understanding of how decentralization (bringing control closer to the individual), individual empowerment and truly free trade & free exchange of ideas creates an emergent property of prosperity for the whole of society.

You wish to avoid a discussion about the role economics and governance has in moving society along a master agenda, one not based on personal choices by an aggregate of large groups of individuals but one based on a group of masters, "governors" or elitists that set such agendas regardless of what individuals or communities desire for themselves. I see the problem of statism the same way I view slavery. Think of how long it took to go from the mindset that slavery is OK, society needs it, it's part of the status quo, to how abhorrent slavery is today to the majority of humans on planet Earth. The same type of shift needs to take place about violence. The concept of freedom and how to protect it is sorely lacking in schools, and is unfortunately taken for granted. That needs to change, and better communication tools address that.

The internet and steemit are a deep resource for finding evidence for the answers you seek. You will not find rock solid, unquestionable proof for how a volunteerist / anacho society would work (on a large scale) but you can find in on smaller scales. There are many, many examples of anarchy in action.

As Larken Rose says, our enemy is not people or institutions or countries, it is belief in authority, a concept. Until the mindset of a sufficient number of people can understand the NAP and see statism for what it is, can see that violence creates more problems than it solves, society is destined to keep repeating the same cycles of tyranny and revolution.

That tells me our efforts should be focused as much on re-education as on building alternatives of integrity to the corrupted systems and institutions dominating money/banking, politics and truly educating our children so they can think for themselves critically rather than being taught to look to some authority figure to provide answers.

The answers you seek are out there waiting for you to discover them, to apply them. Don't rely on others to provide the answers (not that you are doing so), be proactive and do your own investigation and due diligence.

I sincerely hope you take on the challenge. That is the best way to be confident of your position, to actually and deeply understand why you believe what you do about your role in making the world a better place to live for others besides (but not excluding) yourself.

Although your reply does not offer concrete policies and programs of intervention that would address the problem posed, I found this was very helpful, thank you.
I have extracted the principle that we are engaged in an evolutionary process. As I stated in my response to @dantheman I am excited by the possibilities that may emerge in the space created by the social disruption that this program offers.
I have also observed your measured claims for the success of the ideologies in question. The area of traction you emphasise is decentralised, individual, family and local community - based. That seems a sensible model - and perhaps this is the space where creative energies are best spent as we think about expanding the possibilities for freedom.
I still can't see freedom without law. Once we have law, I can't see the absence of centralisation.

Thank you for your affirmation vuyusile. It's worth repeating to say anarchism / voluntarism is not about abolishing rules, it's about abolishing rulerS!

@gavvet, Thank you for writing this post! I am right there with you.

I am a big advocate of non-violence and I think there is a serious lack of realism about how to bring a non-violent society into being. Talking about a bunch of theoretical future scenarios is one thing, figuring out how to get from here to there is where the real work is, in my humble opinion.

I won't answer you here, as I most likely will have an upcoming series on this topic, but I think your'e pointing to a real problem within the anarcho-capitalist communit. I think it might actually be the one thing that holds us back the most.

Very few people go further than listening to a few "enlightened" people go on and on about the immorality of state agression. Very few actually try to create systems capable of REPLACING the state. Indeed, for most people this is even a bit scary to talk about.

They go "What?? You want to replace government with a 'SYSTEM'??!!"

Yes, I do. Consider a cooperative: It is not collectivism, it is not forced membership, it doesn not have monopoly powers, but cooperation can help a lot more people than one person in the streets handing out bags with food. "Teach a person to fish" as the saying goes.

What about survailance, is it always bad? Well no.
Imagine that a cooperative employing its own police ("defence agency") started aiming those cameras and agents of survailance at their police employes during work hours instead of, as the state does, against most citizens.

Anarcho-Capitalists need to get over this fear and illusion of "scams" and "collectivism" in every corner of the world. It's not always there, sometimes people trick themselves and then they go on to trick others.

Right on! I totally agree.

Lovely [holds out a tip jar] ; )

Following you. Looking forward to what sort of content you put out.

Looking forward to your posts - so I will tag on as a follower :-))
Thanks for your views.

I surely don't mean to be rude to this author, but why should anarchism have to have the answers to the problems that Statism caused? These statistics are disheartening, and in looking for possible root causes, we should consider the economic impact of The State, and truly appreciate the scope and size of the problem.

Anarchism is not some magical guarantee of peace and stability. It is not a panacea for the problems that plague our lands, but it does represent opportunity for change. It is interesting that as a people, we often demand of anarchy that which we do not of the state: a concrete plan of action to solve issues.

I appreciate your sincere and extremely well written post, but trying to give you a straight answer would require verbal gymnastics that would be rife with holes.

But suffice to say that government as an idea has only existed in our recorded history for about 7 thousand years. We have been around as this type of human for much longer than that. We use to have God Emperors and kings and queens, and one day we'll say that we used to have government, but all the bad people took it over for immunity so we stopped doing that.

Until then, anything much more than "ranting" will get you added to governments body count. The hard truth is that, if we want a change we have to dismantle what exists and begin again, after removing the rot from the underlying structure. The hardest truth is that we're all just human, and giving back power is the real problem.

I want two things in one form or another:
1 A plan of action to get to realize Anarcho-Capitalism rather than statism.
2 A plan of action to keep that freedom.

Now, I don't demand either of those things "from anarchy".

And in fact I don't fully demand them from anyone but myself, which is why I'm a an AnCap and a Cooperative Agorist CoAg, but I certainly still expect people to use their brains and we do need to come up with something that is actually going to be a viable competition to the state, rather than simply proposing a "random" or "chaotic" inorder not really capable of promoting or worthy of being called a society;
That's not what anarcho-capitalists want anyway. We're not nihilists. We don't want entirely "random" or "chaotic" events to take place -- not entirely --, but "human" events that are a matter of free will being purposefully exercised to the betterment of our own life and the lives of our loved ones.

(And, as you told the author, I mean no offence of course)

Perhaps you missed the point in my original post that accepted that the problem represented a failure by government.
I demand of every ideology/social program/school of thought that it demonstrate its usefulness in real world situations otherwise I won't invest in it.
Did you appreciate the contradiction in your third paragraph?
Government has been around as long as society has been organised in a unit bigger than the nuclear family. Unless we fragment completely to that level, government is here to stay. It is the form that is in issue; the policies and programs that are at stake.
I agree we need change; I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I don't want to be defeatist.

There is no contradiction in my third paragraph. Government as an idea has only existed for about 7 thousand years as far as we can tell. Homosapien has been around for about 200k years.

Where is the contradiction?

We had a world before we organized into revenue extracting governments, and we will have one once these unsustainable power hungry entities burn themselves out or collapse the system and die from lack of tax money. That it takes 10k years for humanity's cycle of dependence on violent government to end and a new paradigm to begin is irrelevant, it will happen. We will either turn into a slave species (arguably already there), or we will shake off the "certainty" that government is the only way the world as it is can exist.

It's not defeatist, it is the greatest hope for life, since government does not care about life and is incompatible with our continued progress as a species.

The contradiction is in the third, not fourth paragraph.
Homo sapiens has not undergone any major species advance in evolution in the last 10 thousand years. It has undergone massive changes in its social organisation thanks in major part to the shift to cropping and urbanisation. Government was born out of the need for a social contract between competitors for scarce resources. The cause of government, whatever its form, has not gone away.
Isn’t your argument a nostalgia for an irrelevant past?
It also seems we are missing each other on the meaning of government. A large part of government, the executive, include people employed in it that care deeply about life. The legislature grapple with real people’s real problems, often trying to alleviate the plight of the weak. Judges constantly make decisions that are just and compassionate. Many laws exist to constitute and instantiate freedom. One cannot ignore this aspect. which is not to abandon our ability to be critical of the shortcomings.
Don’t we ask ourselves, since we recognise their fallabilites, whether they are doing more harm than good. At that point we mobilise to insist on change.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.14
JST 0.029
BTC 57020.43
ETH 3081.72
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.41