On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Matthew X wrote:
> Chompsky makes the point that the state underwrites the so called free market.
> As we are all libertarians,(cept shoate) here we should be doing our utmost
> to expose,ridicule,attack and destroy the state,nest pas?
You're right, I don't want to get rid of the 'state'. I recognize that
anarchy is a concept bereft of any -real world- utility. It may be a great
theory (and I don't even buy into that) but it won't work with -people-.
What I -do- propose is a polycracy (or polyocracy). People need be the
major players in a free market. Where the individuals make all decisions
and live with the results. However, I also recognize that these same
individuals can't be trusted with the resolution of conflicts because they
can not be disinterested, and any system which is arbitrary is not going
to work. It must treat all people identically, it must -not- draw
distinctions based on 'intelligence' or 'wealth', and it must have -no-
interest in the outcome. To do otherwise is to trade one tyrany for another.
What we -do- need is a 3 party social architecture. The first two parties
are producer and consumer. Unless they have a conflict the 3rd party is
powerless to intercede. If there is a conflict the 3rd party steps in and
decides according to a well defined and -public- set of rules. Those
rules must not take into account social issues but -only- principles of
equality. Anarchy can't do that, hence anarchy won't work.
There is one other factor that must come into play, since 'state' is
nothing more than a mechanism for 'law' to provide communal self-defence
-of the individual- (not the state, it is -not- the states job to defend
itself; I call this the 'n-1 Problem'). That is health care. It must be
universal.
The basic principles of this polycracy are:
- The states primary function is defence of the individual
- Equality under the law
- We don't inherit the world from our ancestors, we borrow it from
our children
> "Of the essence of government... it is a thing apart, developing its own
> interests at the expense of what opposes it; all attempts to make it
> anything else fail."
> Voltairine de Cleyre (1866-1912)
If you really believe this then why not shoot yourself now and get it
over with?
--
____________________________________________________________________
We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I
are going to spend the rest of our lives.
Criswell, "Plan 9 from Outer Space"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
