ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Worth Reading: Trevor Pott's editorial on NSA PRISM and its real ramifications

<< < (53/58) > >>

wraith808:
OT Stuff
-Renegade (July 30, 2013, 08:15 AM)
--- End quote ---

Getting more off-topic, so maybe we should thread this to the basement?Doesn't that presume that those ideologies include expansion as a tenet (which none of them necessarily do)

As you said, Anarchism only talks about inflicting on the non-willing. So, and I quote, "Anarchism doesn't preclude people from associating under some set of ideologies, e.g. anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-communism, etc. The only thing it precludes is the initiation of force/violence."

If a group of people got together an formed a democracy, it would be a tyranny of the masses, sure.  But on the masses that want the tyranny.  As long as it remains in the borders and by collusion, then it does work.  And they would have the defensive ability to expel anyone that didn't want to abide by that rule, correct?

Renegade:
Basement? Nah. It's still all fun & games. Nobody is getting vehement about anything. Besides, it's more fun with 40hz in the discussion.

More OT fun!
^Anarchy is great in theory. Too bad it doesn't work in practice for much the same reason communism didn't. It requires a large number of a certain type of high-minded individual that we just don't have.

If you had a world full of that sort of person you wouldn't need anything.

But if you had a world full of unicorns, I'm guessing everything would be just as cool - and just as likely.

I'm not waiting up nights. We can only work with what we've got. ;) ;D :Thmbsup:
-40hz (July 30, 2013, 09:22 AM)
--- End quote ---

We can only work with what we've got?  :'( Because it's working soooo well! :P

That's like introducing your phone to the wonders of Mr. Hammer. Repetitively. Then insisting on making a phone call with it, after all, you "work with what you've got". What we've got ain't working by any stretch of the imagination. What works right now works DESPITE what we've got.

Doesn't that presume that those ideologies include expansion as a tenet (which none of them necessarily do)

As you said, Anarchism only talks about inflicting on the non-willing. So, and I quote, "Anarchism doesn't preclude people from associating under some set of ideologies, e.g. anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-communism, etc. The only thing it precludes is the initiation of force/violence."

If a group of people got together an formed a democracy, it would be a tyranny of the masses, sure.  But on the masses that want the tyranny.  As long as it remains in the borders and by collusion, then it does work.  And they would have the defensive ability to expel anyone that didn't want to abide by that rule, correct?
-wraith808 (July 30, 2013, 11:10 AM)
--- End quote ---

Anarchism gives you the freedom to associate however you choose. I'll skip all the stuff about selling yourself into slavery and that kind of silliness, but suffice it to say that it's a contradiction and just insane. So, back to free associations with people...

So, for "the masses that want the tyranny", it only makes sense to the point that anyone can opt-out. However, that brings up how people contract with each other. In what you've described, it's impossible to have "anarcho-democracy" (I'll just call it that) and have people own land. It would be very much like the feudal system of land ownership that we have now. i.e. Fee simple and not allodial titles. If people owned land, they could opt-out of the system very easily and stay there. But, that's getting into some details.

But yes - in Anarchy people are free to contract with others. If the terms of the contract allowed for expulsion from the community, then so be it.

But (in an Anarchist non-system) people cannot simply band together to force others into a contract. e.g. If there are 100 people in an area, 80 of them don't get to decide to have a Democracy and force the others into it, then decide to expel them if they don't want a Demonocracy. ;) That's an initiation of force/violence/fraud.

The systems we have now are not free. You have guys with guns ready to force you to comply with the arbitrary "laws" that are pulled out of the asses of asses. :P :D

I think a decent summary of Anarchism is "leave me alone and don't tell me what to do". Well, as a negative definition anyways, which is a good contrast to what we have now.

*IF* we had Anarchy, we sure as heck wouldn't have the surveillance state nonsense that we have now.


40hz:
Basement? Nah. It's still all fun & games. Nobody is getting vehement about anything. Besides, it's more fun with 40hz in the discussion.

-Renegade (July 30, 2013, 11:44 AM)
--- End quote ---

Well...I don't know about the fun part....but at least you'll get more funny art and images with 40hz posting. ;D

wraith808:
Basement? Nah. It's still all fun & games. Nobody is getting vehement about anything. Besides, it's more fun with 40hz in the discussion.
-Renegade (July 30, 2013, 11:44 AM)
--- End quote ---

I just meant in terms of this is OT for the thread... and we really couldn't make a non-basement thread that would fit in the living room for the discussion. :)

Let's do the OT againYour last statements bring to the fore anything that doesn't have to do with the immediate.

I don't have the resources, so I ask someone for them.  If they aren't totally altruistic, the lack of the way to enforce the contract (as that would be aggression) comes into question.

I guess it could work like pure barter, but that's not always going to get you through the spots when what you're producing is either not in season, or not in demand.  How do you enforce such things?

Renegade:
More OT @wraith
Your last statements bring to the fore anything that doesn't have to do with the immediate.

I don't have the resources, so I ask someone for them.  If they aren't totally altruistic, the lack of the way to enforce the contract (as that would be aggression) comes into question.

I guess it could work like pure barter, but that's not always going to get you through the spots when what you're producing is either not in season, or not in demand.  How do you enforce such things?
-wraith808 (July 30, 2013, 12:56 PM)
--- End quote ---

This trips up a lot of people. But it's been discussed numerous times.

The first thing to remember is that you can ALWAYS use force for defense. That includes against fraud, etc. So you're not held helpless there.

For barter, that just doesn't matter. There's nothing stopping having a monetary system that isn't government issued. e.g. Bitcoin, litecoin, gold, silver, Canadian Tire money, etc. So don't bother with barter at all - it's antiquated and we have better ways to do things. For things like international trade, you simply buy bitcoin or gold from someone locally with your Canadian Tire money then use bitcoin/gold/whatever. All those problems are solved. Also, with non-central bank currency/money/instruments, you don't have the kind of manipulation that we have now. Kiss the manufactured boom/bust cycles good-bye!  :-*

For enforcement, there is nothing to stop having private services to replace our current judicial and law enforcement. Currently this is happening in Detroit with private companies replacing the police.

I don't really want to get into that all that deep as it really really goes way way OT, but there are lots of resources out there that describe how it can work.

It all seems quite counter-intuitive at first, but if you look into it, it's easy to see that it is a better system.

I know that someone will start in on corruption or conflicts of interest, but when you look a bit deeper, it's easier to see how it is against the interest of a security company to be corrupt. Once that gets out, people would flock to another company. i.e. It's similar to how you have self-policing systems on the Internet.

I've really glossed over things very quickly there. Here's one resource that might help:



That is Larken Rose's YouTube channel. He's an ardent Anarchist and really makes a lot of sense. He speaks very plainly and simply.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version