Total Posts:67|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Anarchy

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:30:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

Of course, the next question comes in as the "Free Rider Problem." Why should I, as an individual home owner in the middle of suburbia, pay for this? So long as my neighbors are paying for protection, I get the benefit from them. While the "defense companies" will not protect my house, by defending my neighbors, they are defacto protecting me (since Mexico is not going to be invading just a few random homes).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:31:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

If America became defenseless and without government, you can bet foreign countries would want to invade. However, the catch is that it is much easier to control a foreign territory if it is a shell state as opposed to anarchic state.

My guess, then, is that foreign governments will start by funding militant groups seeking to re-establish a single or group of smaller governments in the manner that the Soviets and Americans funded third world countries against each other. Whichever side funds the winners will post a military bases a la US in Saudi Arabia to keep out the "anarchic forces" and "foreign operatives."

So, it wouldn't be like Africa back in sword-and-armor imperialism days. It'd be more like cold war third world countries followed by what you might call a secular version of the middle east.

Note that, even without foreign influence, America would eventually have some ruling groups. The only question is how large those groups will be and if America could be united under a single group.

So even unilateral anarchy is futile.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:33:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

The private defense doesn't have to be more powerful than the foreign military, it just has to be strong enough so that foreign military would not have a strong incentive to fight.

There are plenty of countries the US could destroy pretty easily, but we don't.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:38:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?

not defend their house in the event they attack them :p.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:39:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

Another quick question:

Are you using American dollars to pay them? This happens, recall, after the dissolution of the federal reserve, treasury, no internal regulations on transacting American dollars, and no government guarantee of bank reimbursement. Wouldn't do wonders for the exchange rate.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:42:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

The who's guarding who and the who has paid their bills may get a bit scrambled wouldn't it? You also have to take into consideration that it isn't 5 small armies against 1 big one. It's 5 small armies against several big ones. Also, a private defense company would be hesitant to use nukes, missiles, bombs, or anything particularly destructive since it would compromise the safety of those it's supposed to protect.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:42:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?

Free Rider Problem. I pointed it out in my second post. I've never heard of a realistic answer to it. I've heard some alternative options though.

1) The Anarchic society (under AnCap, that is what I've looked into the most) would, of course, be very big into free trade. And as such would open economic relations with all nations. So that if anyone attacked the Anarchists, the other nations (that would lose the economic benefit of trade, should the Anarchists collapse) would provide the defense. So no defense company would be needed. This is, of course, hypothetical that other nations would step in (and be ironic, since most AnCaps are non-interventionists, so expecting and even hoping that others would intervene is comical)

OR

2) The defense companies would also provide the law enforcement and judicial hearings. So by not paying them, you miss out on these services, thus negating the Free Rider Problem, since while an invading army would not both with a single home that didn't pay for defense, a common criminal would.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:43:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

I personally believe that you can't intellectually disagree with something without understanding it.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:43:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

well, not everyone spends their time reading books on anarchy. It's not exactly a common use of time..... Please share with us your knowledge of this indestructable ideology.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:44:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:43:49 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

well, not everyone spends their time reading books on anarchy. It's not exactly a common use of time..... Please share with us your knowledge of this indestructable ideology.

I'm not AnCap brah. More left market anarchist with aspects of syndicalism and Marxism thrown in.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:45:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:38:02 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?

not defend their house in the event they attack them :p.

We're talking about national defense, not a local security force.

If strategy is limited by which geographical areas have the least free-riders, the private armies would be crippled. A good defense means not allowing the enemy to flank, and if the enemy ever got a copy of the private armies' bill collectors, they'd be able to bust right through their lines.

That's why national defense is such a b*tch to privatize without government.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:45:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:39:52 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

Another quick question:

Are you using American dollars to pay them? This happens, recall, after the dissolution of the federal reserve, treasury, no internal regulations on transacting American dollars, and no government guarantee of bank reimbursement. Wouldn't do wonders for the exchange rate.

It could be anything. Gold, some other precious metal, doesn't really matter. The dollar is really just a highly liquid medium for exchange of goods and services.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:45:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:43:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

I personally believe that you can't intellectually disagree with something without understanding it.

Agree with that shat. Though it sometimes causes you to change opinions unfortunately. ;)
I looked into Marxism a lot and ended up agreeing with lot of it.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:48:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:45:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:38:02 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?

not defend their house in the event they attack them :p.

We're talking about national defense, not a local security force.

If strategy is limited by which geographical areas have the least free-riders, the private armies would be crippled. A good defense means not allowing the enemy to flank, and if the enemy ever got a copy of the private armies' bill collectors, they'd be able to bust right through their lines.

That's why national defense is such a b*tch to privatize without government.

Right, but the national defense has the manpower to attack the household that refuses to pay, so why wouldn't they? Which is pretty much how the system works in states anyways.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:48:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:42:14 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

The who's guarding who and the who has paid their bills may get a bit scrambled wouldn't it? You also have to take into consideration that it isn't 5 small armies against 1 big one. It's 5 small armies against several big ones. Also, a private defense company would be hesitant to use nukes, missiles, bombs, or anything particularly destructive since it would compromise the safety of those it's supposed to protect.

They would likely unite for an active defense. And given the history of Private Contractors and their aggressiveness, they wouldn't be nuking the invading army, they'd nuke the army's country (take out their infrastructure, manufacturing, etc, force them to go back home and rebuild).

Kind of like how police and firefighters from different districts can work together pretty easily. Also, "willing to work with other companies" would be a perk that customers would like.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:49:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:44:59 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:43:49 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

well, not everyone spends their time reading books on anarchy. It's not exactly a common use of time..... Please share with us your knowledge of this indestructable ideology.

I'm not AnCap brah. More left market anarchist with aspects of syndicalism and Marxism thrown in.

I'm not seeing the relevance between your response and my comment....
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:51:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:45:58 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:43:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

I personally believe that you can't intellectually disagree with something without understanding it.

Agree with that shat. Though it sometimes causes you to change opinions unfortunately. ;)
I looked into Marxism a lot and ended up agreeing with lot of it.

You're not going back to left-anarchism again, are you? You are allowed to, of course.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:52:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:49:00 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:44:59 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:43:49 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

well, not everyone spends their time reading books on anarchy. It's not exactly a common use of time..... Please share with us your knowledge of this indestructable ideology.

I'm not AnCap brah. More left market anarchist with aspects of syndicalism and Marxism thrown in.

I'm not seeing the relevance between your response and my comment....

You asked for me to share my knowledge with you on AnCap, implying that you were asking me to defend it. I'm saying I don't adhere to orthodox AnCap philosophy anymore. On your thought on reading about anarchist theory, I get that. But it's one thing to realize you don't know a whole lot about something and another to dismiss it like you seem to do with it and communism (can't remember the exact quote but you said you refused to respect anyone who adheres to either ideology once). This is the difference between you and Ore_Ele.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:53:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:42:58 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?

Free Rider Problem. I pointed it out in my second post. I've never heard of a realistic answer to it. I've heard some alternative options though.

1) The Anarchic society (under AnCap, that is what I've looked into the most) would, of course, be very big into free trade. And as such would open economic relations with all nations. So that if anyone attacked the Anarchists, the other nations (that would lose the economic benefit of trade, should the Anarchists collapse) would provide the defense. So no defense company would be needed. This is, of course, hypothetical that other nations would step in (and be ironic, since most AnCaps are non-interventionists, so expecting and even hoping that others would intervene is comical)

OR

2) The defense companies would also provide the law enforcement and judicial hearings. So by not paying them, you miss out on these services, thus negating the Free Rider Problem, since while an invading army would not both with a single home that didn't pay for defense, a common criminal would.

I'm sorry, I couldn't help actually laughing at 1. It sounded exactly like something the native americans would have said when white people came.

Um...I think the anarchists have a rather glaring problem with 2.

We have a term in political science for an organization with a monopoly on domestic and international force and the ability to unilaterally create, interpret, and enforce policies about how much money individuals must give unless they want all services, including protection from robbery, rape, and/or death, withdrawn from them.

It's called "government."
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:53:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:51:06 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:45:58 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:43:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

I personally believe that you can't intellectually disagree with something without understanding it.

Agree with that shat. Though it sometimes causes you to change opinions unfortunately. ;)
I looked into Marxism a lot and ended up agreeing with lot of it.

You're not going back to left-anarchism again, are you? You are allowed to, of course.

It's complicated the way to characterize it but I don't think it sits right in either the right or the left anarchist camp as I think it takes the good parts from both while dismissing the shatty ones i.e. left anarchism's tendency to favor forceful abolition of right anarchist societies and right anarchism's wholesale dismissal of the viability of libertarian socialism.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:56:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:52:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:49:00 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:44:59 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:43:49 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:39:16 PM, socialpinko wrote:
This is a weird day. Lebron is getting a champion ring and Ore_Ele is the most knowledgeable on AnCap in a thread.

well, not everyone spends their time reading books on anarchy. It's not exactly a common use of time..... Please share with us your knowledge of this indestructable ideology.

I'm not AnCap brah. More left market anarchist with aspects of syndicalism and Marxism thrown in.

I'm not seeing the relevance between your response and my comment....

You asked for me to share my knowledge with you on AnCap, implying that you were asking me to defend it. I'm saying I don't adhere to orthodox AnCap philosophy anymore. On your thought on reading about anarchist theory, I get that. But it's one thing to realize you don't know a whole lot about something and another to dismiss it like you seem to do with it and communism (can't remember the exact quote but you said you refused to respect anyone who adheres to either ideology once). This is the difference between you and Ore_Ele.

The bolded part is a gigantic assumption and also false. Also, I'm clearly not dismissing anarchism. I'm asking questions to know how it counters this problem that just occurred to me. Your anger is from things I've said in the past, and you're bringing them up now even though they aren't applicable....at all.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 10:58:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 10:53:33 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:42:58 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:36:10 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:33:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:27:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:25:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/21/2012 10:20:26 PM, 000ike wrote:
Suppose the United States constitution and government were terminated...and we established anarchism. I don't know much about the dynamics of the ideology, but I assume that there would obviously be no such thing as national defense. There will also be no army. Wouldn't foreign powers see this as an opportunity for expansion? A whole economic and geopolitical empire collapsed in one swing, with it's rich and vast territory and affluent society unguarded like sitting ducks. North America would be a battleground, no?

If this scenario is plausible, that means that anarchy can only be established unilaterally on the globe for it to truly exist. What are the odds that such would ever happen in human history?

Well, under AnCap beliefs, if the people want to be protected, they will pay up for their own defenses. Not each person individually, but to a defense company (basically a private contractor). The PC would charge $X per customer, and various companies would spring up to offer defense for their customers (just like insurance companies) and so the better services for the better prices would thrive, ultimately allowing for the most effective and most efficient defense to emerge.

how would separate defenses for separate people, provided by separate companies fair against a united military with a nuclear arsenal, Tanks, ships, missiles, immense numbers and staggering coordination?

Well, lets say it is like insurance companies, where there are only several major players. Let's say 5 different companies provide the protection for everyone. So 60 million people per company at a cost of only $10 per month per person (just a random cost, but $40 a month for a family of 4 is less than car insurance for most). That means each has a budget of $600 million per month, or $7.2 billion a year. And we have 5 armies with a $7.2 billion annual budget to defend us.

It is not hard to imagine that they would be able to put up a substantial defense against any invader.

What does the company do if someone doesn't pay? Not defend their house in the event of war?

Free Rider Problem. I pointed it out in my second post. I've never heard of a realistic answer to it. I've heard some alternative options though.

1) The Anarchic society (under AnCap, that is what I've looked into the most) would, of course, be very big into free trade. And as such would open economic relations with all nations. So that if anyone attacked the Anarchists, the other nations (that would lose the economic benefit of trade, should the Anarchists collapse) would provide the defense. So no defense company would be needed. This is, of course, hypothetical that other nations would step in (and be ironic, since most AnCaps are non-interventionists, so expecting and even hoping that others would intervene is comical)

OR

2) The defense companies would also provide the law enforcement and judicial hearings. So by not paying them, you miss out on these services, thus negating the Free Rider Problem, since while an invading army would not both with a single home that didn't pay for defense, a common criminal would.

I'm sorry, I couldn't help actually laughing at 1. It sounded exactly like something the native americans would have said when white people came.

Um...I think the anarchists have a rather glaring problem with 2.

We have a term in political science for an organization with a monopoly on domestic and international force and the ability to unilaterally create, interpret, and enforce policies about how much money individuals must give unless they want all services, including protection from robbery, rape, and/or death, withdrawn from them.

It's called "government."

As I'll restate. I've never heard a solid argument against the free rider problem.

First, I've actually heard #1 be argued but not well defended.

Anyway, moving onto #2, which has issues that I've never been able to find a resolution for, there wouldn't be a monopoly, there would be several different "companies" and if one charges too much, the customers can just cut the service and go with a different company that provides it at a better value. So long as 1 company isn't physically stronger than all the competition combined (meaning that if 1 company tried to force people against their will, all the others would fight against it), a monopoly wouldn't form.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 11:01:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also, socialpinko, you do understand that anarchy is not a mainstream ideology right? As intelligent as you are, sometimes you act like you don't. You will ALWAYS now and forever find a slew of people who will dismiss anarchism. Everyone that has been raised under traditional religio-democratic values will insult anarchism to death. Get used to it.

The solution isn't to call these people ignorant, even if they are. The solution is to understand the radicalism involved in your ideology and the obvious social reaction it will cause. The burden of proof is on you, and the average person WILL question anarchy without reading all there is to know.

Just saying...
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2012 11:04:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/21/2012 11:01:29 PM, 000ike wrote:
Also, socialpinko, you do understand that anarchy is not a mainstream ideology right? As intelligent as you are, sometimes you act like you don't. You will ALWAYS now and forever find a slew of people who will dismiss anarchism. Everyone that has been raised under traditional religio-democratic values will insult anarchism to death. Get used to it.

The solution isn't to call these people ignorant, even if they are. The solution is to understand the radicalism involved in your ideology and the obvious social reaction it will cause. The burden of proof is on you, and the average person WILL question anarchy without reading all there is to know.

Just saying...

So one has to ogligation to explain the argument, but the other is not going to read the argument. Lulz, what? Why make the argument If the person isn't going to bother reading it anyways.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...