Total Posts:61|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is Anarchy Feasible?

ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 3:12:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is the question for my latest poll. Since there are a lot of anarchist leaning people on this site I want people to go vote on my poll if you can.

It's on the left near the top of the page.
(http://www.conservativepolitico.org...)

Polling aside, discuss.

Is anarchy feasible in modern society?
JamesMadison
Posts: 381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 3:16:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would say "no".

But, to be honest, I am not that knowledgable on the topic.
As a general rule, you'll find that, when a conservative is talking about policy, history, economics, or something serious, liberals are nowhere to be found. But, as soon as a conservative mentions Obama's birthplace or personal life, liberals are everywhere, only to dissappear again when evidence enters the discussion.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:03:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:24:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:16:54 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
^ Care to elaborate?

Well, first of all, the feasibility of it is irrelevant. I'd say that, to borrow a phrase from Cody in a message with him, as long as one can prove that a lack of state is more desirable than state, it doesn't matter how hard it is to pull off, you don't need to plan out how it would work. It's inherently justified.

That's where I come from. I'm, for the most part, an anarchist without adjectives. But, I sympathize with ancaps greatly.

But, anyway: by feasibility, what do you mean? Using the basic def, "capable of being done," of course it's feasible. Once there's no monocentric state or involuntary government, anarchy has been done. It's feasible.

Then again, I'm sure you mean something different. So: what do you mean by "is it feasible?"
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:27:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:24:39 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:16:54 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
^ Care to elaborate?

Well, first of all, the feasibility of it is irrelevant. I'd say that, to borrow a phrase from Cody in a message with him, as long as one can prove that a lack of state is more desirable than state, it doesn't matter how hard it is to pull off, you don't need to plan out how it would work. It's inherently justified.

That's where I come from. I'm, for the most part, an anarchist without adjectives. But, I sympathize with ancaps greatly.

But, anyway: by feasibility, what do you mean? Using the basic def, "capable of being done," of course it's feasible. Once there's no monocentric state or involuntary government, anarchy has been done. It's feasible.

Then again, I'm sure you mean something different. So: what do you mean by "is it feasible?"

Feasible, meaning given today's political and technological culture could it be pulled off and sustained effectively.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:29:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:27:28 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:24:39 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:16:54 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
^ Care to elaborate?

Well, first of all, the feasibility of it is irrelevant. I'd say that, to borrow a phrase from Cody in a message with him, as long as one can prove that a lack of state is more desirable than state, it doesn't matter how hard it is to pull off, you don't need to plan out how it would work. It's inherently justified.

That's where I come from. I'm, for the most part, an anarchist without adjectives. But, I sympathize with ancaps greatly.

But, anyway: by feasibility, what do you mean? Using the basic def, "capable of being done," of course it's feasible. Once there's no monocentric state or involuntary government, anarchy has been done. It's feasible.

Then again, I'm sure you mean something different. So: what do you mean by "is it feasible?"

Feasible, meaning given today's political and technological culture could it be pulled off and sustained effectively.

In that sense, I believe it definitely could. When competition to succeed is involved, I maintain businesses, and individual people, can easily research and find ways to not only sustain resources, but also sustain themselves, and, through want of profit, their customers.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:34:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:29:08 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:27:28 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:24:39 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:16:54 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
^ Care to elaborate?

Well, first of all, the feasibility of it is irrelevant. I'd say that, to borrow a phrase from Cody in a message with him, as long as one can prove that a lack of state is more desirable than state, it doesn't matter how hard it is to pull off, you don't need to plan out how it would work. It's inherently justified.

That's where I come from. I'm, for the most part, an anarchist without adjectives. But, I sympathize with ancaps greatly.

But, anyway: by feasibility, what do you mean? Using the basic def, "capable of being done," of course it's feasible. Once there's no monocentric state or involuntary government, anarchy has been done. It's feasible.

Then again, I'm sure you mean something different. So: what do you mean by "is it feasible?"

Feasible, meaning given today's political and technological culture could it be pulled off and sustained effectively.

In that sense, I believe it definitely could. When competition to succeed is involved, I maintain businesses, and individual people, can easily research and find ways to not only sustain resources, but also sustain themselves, and, through want of profit, their customers.

I'd agree to an extent.

I'm trying to explore the areas of Libertarianism and Anarchy a little more thoroughly.
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:37:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't really know... lol. I'm not so skilled with political philosophy.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:42:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.

Well, they can be enforced by multicentric arbitration and private security firms.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:43:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:42:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.

Well, they can be enforced by multicentric arbitration and private security firms.

But if you have any organization enforcing laws, isn't that government? Also, it gives the power of the enforcers to interpret the laws and if there is no true government won't these firms have the power to abuse their power?
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:47:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:42:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.

Well, they can be enforced by multicentric arbitration and private security firms.

I don't see why you want to bring in private security firms O.o

Do we have private property in this anarchy?
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:47:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:43:40 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:42:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.

Well, they can be enforced by multicentric arbitration and private security firms.

But if you have any organization enforcing laws, isn't that government? Also, it gives the power of the enforcers to interpret the laws and if there is no true government won't these firms have the power to abuse their power?

Well, by laws, it depends on what anarchy you're talking about.

However, generally speaking, the NAP is the only principle enforced, along with contract violations, unless you're in a say, ansoc society in which the voluntary contract of put work in, get resources out from the community pool is violated.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:47:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:47:08 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:42:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.

Well, they can be enforced by multicentric arbitration and private security firms.

I don't see why you want to bring in private security firms O.o

Do we have private property in this anarchy?

Yes we would.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:50:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:47:08 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:42:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:39:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:37:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:36:15 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Also what kind and size anarchy are we talking about?

Is it by the American understanding with no goverment or a more European understanding as a society that don't use force or authority to enforce laws?

Does it need to be nation wide? What about smaller anarchistic groups?

No government in the form of a state meaning all people are responsible for themselves without any kind of organized state or laws etc.

Well, no organized state.

There can definitely be laws in the forms of common principles/rules.

But that can only be enforced by the people on an individual basis.

Well, they can be enforced by multicentric arbitration and private security firms.

I don't see why you want to bring in private security firms O.o

Do we have private property in this anarchy?

Absolutely. All property in a voluntaryist anarchy is private property: whether it be the property voluntarily obtained by an individual, or the one voluntarily obtained and shared by a group.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:00:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

How would you enforce it?
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:03:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

Won't that break down into a populist government?
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:03:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 5:00:55 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

How would you enforce it?

What I just said. Private security to prevent breaches, and private, multicentric arbitration to arbitrate after a breach.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:07:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 5:03:55 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:00:55 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

How would you enforce it?

What I just said. Private security to prevent breaches, and private, multicentric arbitration to arbitrate after a breach.

I'm still skeptical on how this would work.
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:08:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 5:03:55 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:00:55 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

How would you enforce it?

What I just said. Private security to prevent breaches, and private, multicentric arbitration to arbitrate after a breach.

But what if the guy who breach owns the Private security?

It is not that I don't belive in Anarchy. I have seen different forms and kinds of anarchy work. The American take on it is just rather foreign.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:09:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 5:07:20 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:03:55 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:00:55 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

How would you enforce it?

What I just said. Private security to prevent breaches, and private, multicentric arbitration to arbitrate after a breach.

I'm still skeptical on how this would work.

Well, again: anarchism is such a completely different way of life than what we have now that it's near impossible to accurately imagine.

Also, once again, I don't think that one must prove every little aspect of anarchistic life to validate the political philosophy.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:11:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 5:09:59 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:07:20 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:03:55 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 5:00:55 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:54:46 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/31/2012 4:53:04 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Funny. I would belive that if you have private property, anarchy is only a small step away from being a dictatorship.

Not if it's all voluntarily transacted.

And when it's breached: in comes the multicentric arbitration.

How would you enforce it?

What I just said. Private security to prevent breaches, and private, multicentric arbitration to arbitrate after a breach.

I'm still skeptical on how this would work.

Well, again: anarchism is such a completely different way of life than what we have now that it's near impossible to accurately imagine.

Also, once again, I don't think that one must prove every little aspect of anarchistic life to validate the political philosophy.

I agree on that last part.

However, I'm a believer that no matter what, even if we had an anarchy, it would eventually form into some sort of government.

People love power.
People love structure.
People group together.

These three things will always result in government of some kind.
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:11:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Depending on how your multicentric arbitration is, there it is also open for the possibility of bribe and corruption.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 5:22:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 5:11:54 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
Depending on how your multicentric arbitration is, there it is also open for the possibility of bribe and corruption.

And?

There's bribery and corruption every day in monocentric governments. The difference is that they are a) involuntary, the only option.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus