Re: left anarchy, right anarchy

The Free Marketeer (
Sun, 28 Sep 1997 19:54:26 -0800

> packages. for instance, most "free-market" people hate abortion,
> women's lib, drug use, and are (frequently) christian
> fundamentalists and creationists. Our first attempt must be to go
> behind these "packages". I think the core "socialist values" can

That is a really silly stereotype. What you described,
"conservatism", has nothing to do with the essence of the true
free market. The true free market goes beyond the scope of just
economic liberality, embracing BOTH the redeeming virtues of the
"left" AND "right", both social and economic. In that sense, it
is a "centrist" anarchy. Unfortunately, there are very, very few
individuals in the world that think this way and also practice it.

I've witnessed very few (if any at all), "conservative",
"religious", "constitutional" and/or "patriot" types that can
grasp beyond their dogma to a truly free marketplace of all types
of competing ideas. The same exact problem "liberals" evidence.
So it would be a serious mistake to define "free market" narrowly
or biasedly -- for that is the problem!

Much to my disapointment, this kind of "centrist" anarchy is never
going to be practical as long as nation-states dominate the planet.
The economies of scale are too great to compete with or defend
against. Until I evidence otherwise, I lean towards the belief
that social progress of any kind happens only with new technologies
eliminating the status quo.

> I'd prefer to ask: since the governement exists, and we cannot
> destroy it next sunday after lunch, how to use it ? I prefer to
> see it feed the homeless rather than using my money for army or
> making gifts to big corporations....

Just because a fiction is believed to exist doesn't mean it has to
be utilized by anyone personally, especially if they can do
something more efficiently with non-coercion and with more control
over the end results.

If it isn't an oxymoron, I can think of only one valid reason for
"government" to exist at all: to maintain a monopoly on violence
to prevent competition in that sector. By using sortition to
select random individuals for the "government" administration, the
free marketplace would provide everything. This would be true
power to the people.

As it stands today, "government" is merely a specialist class of
entrenched, intentionally-cultivated individuals acting in their
own self-interest (while saying the opposite). So I see no
rationalization for these parasites to provide anything at all as
they don't represent my interests (as if they could!) nor the
majority of anyone elses. The small segment of little parasites
that are their "customers" can be served more cheaply and
efficiently by the free market anyhow.

> Uh, really ? don't you do the same cult-like dichotomy by saying
> Hitler was a left-wing extremist ? I lurk this list since several
> weeks, and I thought that since a clever post by Hagbard/Keith,
> nobody here would dare to put the Hitler card on the desk,
> especially so quickly....

My point about Hitler was to show how distortions occur because of
dogmatic dichotomies biased in favor of the status quo. It's a
lot like terrorcrats shuffling paperwork back and forth among
themselves to avoid facing responsibility. Nothing gets done, no
progress is made, but they all smile smugly together.