2015-01-09 14:55 GMT+01:00 Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]>: > > > 2015-01-09 13:55 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-01-09 13:22 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 6:50 AM, John Clark <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> > What would you suggest in place of a democracy? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If we were starting from scratch I would suggest Anarcho-Capitalism, I >>>>> think it would be far superior to democracy, but unfortunately we are not >>>>> starting from scratch and so it would be very difficult to get there from >>>>> here; >>>>> >>>> >>>> I thought of writing something very similar to this but then decided >>>> not to bother. Not because of Bruno -- he is very respectful of other >>>> people's opinions and always argues the ideas without resorting to name >>>> calling. >>>> >>>> For some reason that I quite never understood, Anarcho-Capitalism >>>> (which is just an idea) seriously offends people, to a level that makes me >>>> think that it goes against the dogmas of some invisible religion. >>>> >>> >>> Anarcho-capitalism is bad... because it has nothing to do with anarchism >>> in the first place except the abolition of states... as accumulation of >>> wealth is kept under some hands, hierarchy is kept, and so >>> Anarcho-capitalism can only leads to the richer are the rulers... money is >>> coercion. >>> >> >> Money becomes coercive under statism, because it becomes illegal to use >> alternative currencies, operate outside of the banking and taxation system >> and so on. >> >> Under anarchy, you and me are free to create our own currency or our own >> arrangement if the dominant one no longer serves us. For example, if the >> rich become to rich, they run the risk that the majority will opt out >> > If because they are rich, and already have coercive power due to that wealth, it will be difficult for you to opt out of it... and as anarcho-capitalism has no way to prevent that, it's doomed unless people are care bears which they're not... especially utlra wealthy people.
> of that currency and start trading goods under a new one. So the levels of >> confiscation and transference of wealth from the poor to the rich that we >> are witnessing today are only possible by state coercion. >> >> The absurd levels of wealth inequality that we have today are only >> possible by coercion: by central banks printing new money that they lend >> only to the 1%, by "too big too fail" bailouts, by a banking system that >> can operate on fake money allowing for the rich people to leverage their >> investments so much that the game is rigged. These things are not a >> property of "money", they are a property of "state". >> >> I find the idea that the goal of Anarchy is to make hierarchies disappear >> bizarre. >> > > Because that's what it means, like monarchy means "one" ruler, anarchy is > the absence of ruler, the absence of hierarchical authority. Using anarchy > as synonym of chaos is a mistake, it's anomie, not anarchy. > > >> Hierarchies are, in many cases, an excellent organisational tool. >> > > They could be, but they implies coercion, because hierarchy implies > someone upper in the hierarchy can decide for someone lower... if it's not > the case, then it's not a hierarchical authority. > > >> I would say that the goal of Anarchy is to remove the compulsory >> participation in hierarchies -- like we have in democracy. But if I accept >> that you are more capable than me in some endeavour and decide to accept >> you as the boss for our mutual benefit, why not? This is not coercion. >> > > It is not until you accept it and you have been meant to accept it... > read: It is not until you accept it and how you have been made to accept it... > at the moment that your boss has coercive capacity against you, what will > make you have the capacity to go against it ? We're talking about hierarchy > here, not collaborative working for the benefit of both that you seem to > conflate. > > Regards, > Quentin > > >> >> Telmo. >> >> >>> >>> Quentin >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> but don't let the word "anarchy" scare you, it just means lack of >>>>> government. Chaos necessarily implies anarchy but anarchy does not >>>>> necessarily imply chaos. >>>>> >>>>> Good laws are no different from anything else, if you want to maximize >>>>> something then make it a commodity and sell it on the free market. But >>>>> nobody does that for laws very much , that's why there are far more good >>>>> cars than good laws. In a world with minimal or no government Privately >>>>> Produced Law (PPL) would have Private Protection Agencies (PPA's) to back >>>>> them up. Disputes among PPA's would be settled by an independent >>>>> arbitrator >>>>> agreed to by both parties BEFORE the disagreement happened. Something like >>>>> that can exist today. When companies sign complicated contracts they >>>>> sometimes also agree on who will arbitrate it if differences in >>>>> interpretation happen. Nobody wants to get caught up in the slow, >>>>> expensive >>>>> court system run by governments. >>>>> >>>>> The arbitrator is paid by the case, and because he is picked by both >>>>> sides, it's in his interest to be as just as possible. If he favored one >>>>> side over >>>>> another or made brutal or stupid decisions he would not be picked >>>>> again and would need to look for a new line of work. Unlike present day >>>>> judges and >>>>> juries, justice would have a positive survival value for the >>>>> arbitrator. >>>>> >>>>> All parties would have a reason to avoid violence if possible. The >>>>> disputing parties would not want to turn their front yard into a war zone, >>>>> and violence is expensive. The successful protection agencies would be >>>>> more >>>>> interested in making money than saving face. Most of the time this would >>>>> work so I expect the total level of violence to be less than in the nation >>>>> state system we have now, but I'm not such a utopian as to suggest it will >>>>> drop to zero. Even when force is not used the implicit threat is always >>>>> there, another good reason to be civilized. >>>>> >>>>> Please note that I'm not talking about justice only for the rich. If a >>>>> rich man's PPA makes unreasonable demands (beatings, sidewalk justice, I >>>>> insist >>>>> on my mother being the judge if I get into trouble,etc) it's going to >>>>> need one hell of a lot of firepower to back it up. That kind of an army is >>>>> expensive >>>>> because of the hardware needed and because of the very high wages it >>>>> will need to pay its employees for an extremely dangerous job. To pay for >>>>> all >>>>> this they will need to charge their clients enormous fees severely >>>>> limiting their customer base and that means even higher charges. They >>>>> could >>>>> never get >>>>> the upper hand, because the common man's PPA would be able to outspend >>>>> a PPA that had outrageous demands and was just for the super rich. A yacht >>>>> cost much more than a car, yet the Ford motor Company is far richer than >>>>> all the yacht builders on the planet combined. >>>>> >>>>> No system can guarantee justice to everybody all the time but you'd >>>>> have the greatest chance of finding it in Anarcho-Capitalism. In a >>>>> dictatorship one man's whim can lead to hell on earth, I don't see how 40 >>>>> million Germans could have murdered 6 million Jews in a >>>>> Anarcho-Capitalistic world. Things >>>>> aren't much better in a Democracy, 51% can decide to kill the other >>>>> 49%, nothing even close to that is possible in Anarchy, even >>>>> theoretically. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes. Nazis where an extreme case of statism and collectivism, and they >>>> were democratically elected. Let's not pretend otherwise. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> In general, the desire not to be killed is much stronger than the >>>>> desire to kill a stranger, even a Jewish stranger. Jews would be willing >>>>> to >>>>> pay as much as necessary, up to and including their entire net worth not >>>>> to >>>>> be killed. I doubt if even the most rabid anti Semite would go much beyond >>>>> 2%. As a result the PPA protecting Jews would be much stronger than the >>>>> one >>>>> that wants to kill them. In Anarchy, for things that are REALLY important >>>>> to you (like not getting killed) you have much more influence than just >>>>> one >>>>> man one vote. >>>>> >>>>> I can't give you a iron clad guarantee that some Private Protection >>>>> Agency won't switch from being a protector to being an oppressor, but I >>>>> can't give you an iron clad guarantee that the US Army will not overthrow >>>>> the government and set up a military dictatorship either. They certainly >>>>> have the means to do so if they wished to. I don't think that's very >>>>> likely >>>>> to happen, but it's far more likely than the sort of organization I'm >>>>> talking about doing it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Exactly. Unfortunately, realising that the "guarantees" afforded by >>>> statism stand on nothing, and are probably much weaker than structures >>>> created by networks of self-interest, requires a level of abstract thinking >>>> that the majority of people are either incapable of, or unwilling to embark >>>> on. >>>> >>>> >>>>> The instant a PPA starts acting in a totalitarian way customers would >>>>> abandon it , shut off its money supply and stop its cancerous growth in >>>>> the >>>>> bud. That is a powerful tool that we don't have today, with the US Army >>>>> you >>>>> are forced to keep sending it money through taxes even if you hate what >>>>> it's doing. >>>>> >>>>> But this is all theoretical, as I say we are such a enormously long >>>>> way from Anarcho-Capitalism that it may be too late and it's just not >>>>> practical to get to there from here. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Unfortunately I agree. Statism is a very powerful cultural virus, >>>> because it generates a huge population of dependent people. It takes >>>> control of the minds of the citizens from a young age, using Prussian army >>>> educational technology, teaching dependence and doing it's best to kill >>>> critical thought and creativity. It's a technology designed to create >>>> armies and it's very good at that. >>>> >>>> War is the natural talent of nation states. It's what they where >>>> invented for and it's the only thing they can really do well. With this >>>> inclination comes an addiction to growth, that creates ecological problems >>>> that it tries to solve through more statism. And round we go. >>>> >>>> Maybe starting from scratch will be possible one day, either in another >>>> planet or in another computation. >>>> >>>> Telmo. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> John K Clark >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy >>> Batty/Rutger Hauer) >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy > Batty/Rutger Hauer) > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
