Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

How to Abolish the Government

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 7:42:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It should be obvious, at this point, that an open source program could be developed that would ensure transparency and equality in voting and voting outcomes. In fact, a program could be developed to try and figure out how many Americans are in favor of abolishing the government. If 51% of adults are in favor of overthrowing the government, volunteer militias could accomplish that task.

There is only one thing in history which has caused governments to experience premature death: the destruction of their law enforcement. So why has statelessness been so sporadic and temporary throughout history? Violence is an extremely valuable service to have on your side. And there's always been some rich guys willing to pay that price. Elections and welfare systems are instituted after-the-fact, as a form of PR management to try and prevent insurrection. We cannot outbid the robber barons for control over the police. We can, however, make it very dangerous to be a law enforcement officer. To make it dangerous is to make it more expensive to pay someone to run around kidnapping people. Less police officers will be hired and more will quit. At a certain point, the ratio becomes unsustainable. And, because governments are corporations, the government goes out of business. But anti-police insurrection also voices a strong social sentiment of rejection of the state. It creates a severe taboo: the taboo of being a police officer.

In order to have a more sustainable insurrection and a more permanent statelessness than previous incidents in history, the means of smashing state must be reinforced. Previous successful insurrections only occurred when there were drastic state measures taken very quickly, such as the attempt of the Helvetic Republic to impose taxes on the Swiss, or the killing sprees against the Somali people, carried out under Siad Barre. However, once those states were abolished, new states were formed (albeit smaller and more numerous ones) that covered most of the territory previously claimed by federal state(s). Once conditions are comfortable, you see the tyranny but you don't care enough to fight it. Freedom fighters, if they are to have victory for long, must have the means of rapidly dissecting new governments.

What destroys states is a volunteer phenomenon. It's self-defense. It's spontaneous community defense. So volunteer militias must establish themselves as the bedrock of our new society. But they must be permanent volunteer militias with people on call 24/7, who's laws are determined by direct democracy of the people within the militia's territory. By opening themselves up for direct democracy, they give themselves instant legitimacy in comparison to their enemies (the police).

The Swiss insurrection against the Helvetic Republic resulted in locally controlled direct democracies. These cantons managed to maintain a very free society in Switzerland for over 100 years. Direct democracy makes authoritarianism in politics impossible. So how could we get closer to anarchy than Switzerland got? If history is to judge, we would need to abolish our respective states with insurrectionary civilian militias that establish themselves as volunteers who take their orders by direct democracy. This creates the most cooperative non-hierarchical community security model that I can imagine. In this way, we will finally have real public servants. What is enforced is merely a consensus among the residents of given militia's territory. Direct democracy applied directly to volunteer militias prevents another state from arising.

What prevents these militias from ignoring the orders of their people? If they did so, they would instantly offend most of the people in their community (becoming new smaller targets for a new larger insurrectionary militia). Brutality against the public, on the part of a volunteer militia, would be suicide. Donations to these militias would naturally rise and fall based on the threat environment. The size of the militias would naturally grow and shrink based on threat environment. If a certain minority felt misrepresented by the volunteer militia in their territory, they could always form their own. The only people who volunteer militias wouldn't be available to are those who have such a minority opinion that they are viewed as crazy and hallucinating by everyone.

While it may be argued that this system of open source insurrectionary volunteer direct democracy represents a state (or government), it's not taxpayer funded, so it's less statist than plain old direct democracy (Switzerland), and it requires abolishing our current governments to implement it.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:06:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 7:42:03 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
It should be obvious, at this point, that an open source program could be developed that would ensure transparency and equality in voting and voting outcomes. In fact, a program could be developed to try and figure out how many Americans are in favor of abolishing the government. If 51% of adults are in favor of overthrowing the government, volunteer militias could accomplish that task.

There is only one thing in history which has caused governments to experience premature death: the destruction of their law enforcement. So why has statelessness been so sporadic and temporary throughout history? Violence is an extremely valuable service to have on your side. And there's always been some rich guys willing to pay that price. Elections and welfare systems are instituted after-the-fact, as a form of PR management to try and prevent insurrection. We cannot outbid the robber barons for control over the police. We can, however, make it very dangerous to be a law enforcement officer. To make it dangerous is to make it more expensive to pay someone to run around kidnapping people. Less police officers will be hired and more will quit. At a certain point, the ratio becomes unsustainable. And, because governments are corporations, the government goes out of business. But anti-police insurrection also voices a strong social sentiment of rejection of the state. It creates a severe taboo: the taboo of being a police officer.

In order to have a more sustainable insurrection and a more permanent statelessness than previous incidents in history, the means of smashing state must be reinforced. Previous successful insurrections only occurred when there were drastic state measures taken very quickly, such as the attempt of the Helvetic Republic to impose taxes on the Swiss, or the killing sprees against the Somali people, carried out under Siad Barre. However, once those states were abolished, new states were formed (albeit smaller and more numerous ones) that covered most of the territory previously claimed by federal state(s). Once conditions are comfortable, you see the tyranny but you don't care enough to fight it. Freedom fighters, if they are to have victory for long, must have the means of rapidly dissecting new governments.

What destroys states is a volunteer phenomenon. It's self-defense. It's spontaneous community defense. So volunteer militias must establish themselves as the bedrock of our new society. But they must be permanent volunteer militias with people on call 24/7, who's laws are determined by direct democracy of the people within the militia's territory. By opening themselves up for direct democracy, they give themselves instant legitimacy in comparison to their enemies (the police).

The Swiss insurrection against the Helvetic Republic resulted in locally controlled direct democracies. These cantons managed to maintain a very free society in Switzerland for over 100 years. Direct democracy makes authoritarianism in politics impossible. So how could we get closer to anarchy than Switzerland got? If history is to judge, we would need to abolish our respective states with insurrectionary civilian militias that establish themselves as volunteers who take their orders by direct democracy. This creates the most cooperative non-hierarchical community security model that I can imagine. In this way, we will finally have real public servants. What is enforced is merely a consensus among the residents of given militia's territory. Direct democracy applied directly to volunteer militias prevents another state from arising.

What prevents these militias from ignoring the orders of their people? If they did so, they would instantly offend most of the people in their community (becoming new smaller targets for a new larger insurrectionary militia). Brutality against the public, on the part of a volunteer militia, would be suicide. Donations to these militias would naturally rise and fall based on the threat environment. The size of the militias would naturally grow and shrink based on threat environment. If a certain minority felt misrepresented by the volunteer militia in their territory, they could always form their own. The only people who volunteer militias wouldn't be available to are those who have such a minority opinion that they are viewed as crazy and hallucinating by everyone.

While it may be argued that this system of open source insurrectionary volunteer direct democracy represents a state (or government), it's not taxpayer funded, so it's less statist than plain old direct democracy (Switzerland), and it requires abolishing our current governments to implement it.

I'm sure the rest of the world would be overjoyed if he US abolished it's government. However, it's not reality to think it will but only some precocious teenager having wet dreams about libertarianism or anarchy or some other ridiculous fantasy.
Juris
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 8:40:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Establish cooperatives among people to ensure peace and order after abolishing the government. Also, it will give smooth transition.
To the question on how to abolish the government, I respond that an agreement by the people will make it, like a social contract in a different way. This way they can abolish the government without violence.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 11:34:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 8:40:54 AM, Juris wrote:
Establish cooperatives among people to ensure peace and order after abolishing the government. Also, it will give smooth transition.
To the question on how to abolish the government, I respond that an agreement by the people will make it, like a social contract in a different way. This way they can abolish the government without violence.

You should spearhead the movement Juris! I would recommend starting with the remaining tea baggers and maybe making Rand Paul and Ted Cruz your leaders. They'll pretend to do anything for political gain even though both of them are too smart to ever truthfully back such rabid right ranting ideas.