RE: Understanding the free market (or how you should learn to stop worrying and not be butthurt)
"The first criterion that defines freedom is the ability to deprive others of their freedom. What would be the point of being free and what, in concrete terms, would it mean, if one could not trample on the freedom of others? That is the primary expression of freedom." (Foucault, M, 1976 'Society must be defended' p. 157).
This somehow seemed like a quote I had to dig up and share.
The same principle seems to apply to anarchism whose tenants require freedom and an acceptance that there are winners and there are losers. In an anarchistic society those who wield power deserve to do so and they are not supposed to be held accountable via justice or fairness or some such nonsense.
Note: If you are an anarchist who believes that you should not be subject to rules and control, and you are, then suck it up. Clearly those who make the rules are more powerful then you and they can do what they like right?
Great post! :)
Anarchy doesn't mean you are free from rules, only that there are no rulers: an-archy, no-rulers. That's what it means. It doesn't say no-rules. Rules can be created by a community that agrees to them and upholds them, with consequences for their violation enacted by the whole community, not one or a few ruling over everyone else where they can create and violate any rules they want. Just like one person can enact consequences on another's wrong-actions in anarchy, a community can do the same.
One person's freedom ends where another's begins. Freedom doesn't come without consequences when people can act. Unfortunately, on Steemit you can't act physically onthe same level, the ability to act comes with SP. Those who have the most SP have the most ability to act.
And where does another's freedom begin? Their private property? Because most anarchists are against private property.
I find anarchismt to be a tedious long form to get around to being a benevolent authoritarian. There are of course rules - the rules made by the community. And there is of course inherent tyranny in this - potentially more so than in alternative systems. Why? Because who is responsible? Nobody in particular, yet everyone who accepted and are enforcing the rules.
Moral laws are the rules. Rules of conduct for behavior based on how behavior creates harm to other beings. Freedom of behavior ends when you create harm for others. People, like false "anarchists", who believe the fruits of your labor are not yours... are confused. It violates moral law, the rules we can easily recognize and agree to because they are how things are morally.