Re: Libertarian theory breaking down

From: Amara Graps (amara@amara.com)
Date: Mon Mar 24 2003 - 04:16:40 MST

  • Next message: Mike Lorrey: "Re: [WAR] Exponential difference in power"

    Technotranscendence, Sat Mar 22, 2003 07:46 am:

    >On Saturday, March 22, 2003 1:22 AM Samantha Atkins
    >samantha@objectent.com wrote:
    >> I am more inclined to the minarchist position. However,
    >> I don't believe I have studied the question deeply enough
    >> to make a fully informed choice. Can you or anyone
    >> here recommend sources for the anarchocapitalist
    >> position and theory?

    >Funny you should ask.:)

    [good resources followed]

    Very nice list, Dan.

    Here's one more. This author analyzes in detail a national defense
    for an anarchist society, so this then might address Rafal's concerns.

    According to this author's categorization, I would be one of those
    who say "there would be no state to conquer". I don't mind. I'm glad
    that this author has given a lot of thought to the concept, and I
    appreciate the many people who are thinking and looking into this
    idea. Preston analyzes Hoppe, and he does address the free rider
    problem. Whether that is satisfactory, is up to the readers.

    http://www.anti-state.com/article.php?article_id=330

    Anarchist National Defense and Foreign Policy
    by Keith Preston

    In fifteen years of attempting to explain anarchist ideas to others,
    by far the most common objection I have encountered involves the
    matter of the alleged vulnerability of an anarchist society or
    territory to external marauders or invaders. It is claimed that a
    powerful centralized state in possession of a large military
    bureaucracy is essential if outward aggressors are to be deterred or
    repelled. If an anarchist nation were to be little more than a
    "sitting duck", ripe for conquest by any foreign power willing to
    make the effort, then this would indeed seem to be a fatal blow to
    the anarchist position. The defensibility of an anarchist society,
    in a military sense, is a crucial : perhaps the most crucial
    : question in determining the legitimacy of anarchism as
    viable political philosophy.

    Unfortunately, this is also the realm of anarchist thought where the
    varying schools of anarchism are the least well-developed. Some
    anarchists deny that military defense is necessary at all and
    profess either outright pacifism or make the extravagant claim that
    an anarchist society would be immune to military conquest because
    "there would be no state to conquer", citizens of the anarchist
    society would resist conquest through civil disobedience, an
    anarchist nation would have no enemies, "the free market would take
    care of it," or other inanities. All of this seems to me to be
    wishful thinking of the highest order. The question of military
    defense is one that anarchists must be able to answer effectively if
    anarchist ideas are to ever be taken seriously by more than a
    handful of people. With the notable exception of David Friedman (1),
    no major anarchist theoretician has ever attempted to deal with this
    question in a realistic or nuanced manner. Even those who have
    approached the issue, like Hans Hermann Hoppe or the Tannehills (2),
    rely on some simplistic assertion, like the idea of defense services
    provided by insurance agencies, as a means of dismissing the
    question. Simply put, anarchists are going to have to do better than
    that. The efficacy of anarcho-armies organized by insurance
    companies is by no means a proven fact. Much, much more serious
    study and analysis needs to be given to this issue of utmost
    importance. It would seem that there are three primary questions
    that need to be answered: the matter of how anarchist defense forces
    would be organized and financed, the manner by which the task of
    actually defending an anarchist country would be executed, and the
    implications of a post-nuclear world for anarchist military theory.

    [...]

    --------------

    See the article for the details.

    -- 
    ********************************************************************
    Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara@amara.com
    Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
    Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
    ********************************************************************
    "You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants
    don't help."  --Calvin
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Mar 24 2003 - 05:28:28 MST