RE: How do you calm down the hot-heads?

From: matus (matus@matus1976.com)
Date: Fri Sep 12 2003 - 00:50:27 MDT

  • Next message: Samantha Atkins: "Re: Excel - was RE: How do you calm down the hot-heads?"

    >-----Original Message-----
    >From: Randall Randall
    >
    >
    >> Great, so who ever has bigger guns wins out. And why do you
    >call this
    >> 'peacefull' anarchy exactly? And how is this any better than the
    >> current post-industrialize west system? Do you not think a local
    >> warlord pointing a gun at your face to take some of your
    >food you grew
    >> on your farm is 'alienation of labor'?
    >
    >Straw man. He said he was for anarchy; your question implies
    >a State (the local warlord), in a way that suggests you think
    >that is really what he wants.

    To assert that an anarchy will always remain an equal division of threat
    and power is absurd. I feel it reasonable to assume smaller and smaller
    groups will amass more and more power, leading to war lords and fuedel
    asque societies. I do not prefer to live in a society ruled only by the
    barrel of a Gun.

    >
    >Personally, I regard the State as nothing more than very
    >successful criminals. Therefore, we don't have a perfectly
    >peaceful anarchy as long as there is anyone performing
    >functions similar to the State (murder, theft, kidnapping,
    >etc). Nevertheless, I am sure that it's possible to get
    >closer than we are.
    >
    >> I don't exactly want to maintain
    >> an arsenal, can I pay someone else to do it and ensure no one
    >> threatens me with their aresenal? Isnt that, in a way, what
    >I am all
    >> ready doing with my taxes?
    >
    >No, it isn't. If it were,...

    The point I am trying to make is that if a in an anarchist society,
    someone provides protection as a service, then the good ol economics of
    scale will come into play, and the larger protection groups will provide
    better protection for less cost. Eventually, one or two of them will
    have the vast majority of the clientelle, really not functionally much
    different from a minarchist state. How would such a growth of power be
    stopped in a 'peaceful anarchy' or anarchy socialist (I imaging it
    wouldn't be any issue in an anarcho-capitalist society)

    >> After all, if someone comes up to me with a gun, I call
    >> those people I pay, and they are hear to drag off the gun toting nut
    >> and
    >> keep him, basically, from f-ing with me.
    >
    >Have you tried that? :) In practice, what they do is exact
    >revenge on those who f-ed with you. Once in a while. If they
    >find them. To make it clearer that protection is not the
    >goal, they make it difficult to
    >protect yourself, too. Even if they successfully exact revenge upon
    >your attacker, however, it won't help *you*.
    >

    A much more complex issue I don't feel to delve into. As a minarchist
    liberterian, I would probably agree with the vast majority of your
    complaints of government. In most of the comments, I am trying to
    understand Robbie's position, not presenting my own theory of moral
    statehood.

    Michael Dickey



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 12 2003 - 00:58:32 MDT