On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 2015-01-10 23:12 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Alberto G. Corona <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-01-10 22:10 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Alberto G. Corona <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> John, >>>>> >>>>> But trade need an environment where some force and some love are >>>>> necessary. Trade without enforcement of contracts does not work. >>>>> >>>> >>>> There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. >>>> >>> >>> I would like to know. I have a long experience in discussions with >>> anarco capitalists, since I was one of them for a time >>> >>>> >>>> Take Silk Road. By it's very nature it could not resort to any of the >>>> law enforcement or judicial systems maintained by the state. It didn't even >>>> use the state's currency. Yet it had a large number of happy buyers and >>>> sellers. It worked perfectly well under self-regulation. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Neither work without some sincere love for what one does and for the >>>>> well being of the client. trade without force need an utopic quantity of >>>>> love. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It might only need rational agents: one's reputation is more valuable >>>> in the long run than immediate profit, one should due one's due diligence >>>> before entering large trades. Again, this is how any successful illegal >>>> market operates. And many do. >>>> >>>> A rational agent is a gangster, or a swindler. No intention to be >>> sarcastic here. Both are perfect rational agents, and both will be present >>> in any market environment ready to destroy the win-win game of the market. >>> That is the reason why force and love are necessary. >>> >> >> If there are enough rational agents in the market, cooperation becomes >> more profitable than misbehaviour. Rational agents will be careful about >> who they enter large transaction with. So the access to high transactions >> becomes dependent on reputation, and reputation becomes more valuable than >> the profits from misbehaving on smaller trades. >> >> This is why Silk Road worked, even though people could send flour instead >> of cocaine, and the buyer would have no recourse to the police or the >> courts. >> > > Did you mean violence did not exists ? > Yes. In fact one of the criticisms over the shutting down of Silk Road is that it was reducing violent crimes, by moving a significant percentage of drug trading to a non-violent environment. > the recourse was simple... killing, coercion... > No, it was an anonymous market. People used TOR addresses, bitcoins and PO boxes. Think about it, it would have to be anonymous, otherwise it would be trivial for the police to go after sellers. > if that is an example of "free" market... then I'll prefer not to be part > of it. > And that's another advantage of free markets over governments: you can chose not to participate. Governments will eventually through you in a cage for attempting to opt-out. > > Anarcho-capitalism is a non-sense and an hijacking of the meaning of > anarchism... anarchism cannot be capitalistic... that's a non-sequitur. > So I live in an anarchist society and decide to start my own currency. Am I going to be prevented from doing it? Then there's authority and coercion and it's not really an anarchist society, is it? Telmo. > > Quentin > > >> >> >>> >>> It is so evident for me that I would be very very surprised to find that >>> you convince me after years of arguing with anarco-capitalists >>> >>> >>>> Telmo. >>>> >>>> >>>>> trade without love need big quantity of force. >>>>> >>>>> It is a pity to see all these modern ideologies that are nothing but >>>>> simplifications and adaptations of Christian concepts. No political >>>>> system >>>>> is better than other. The Christian call for a personal revolution, called >>>>> conversion, to change what is around and have a better society, not a >>>>> political change. Paul called for the obedience of the Cesar, and the >>>>> Cesar at that time was Nero. Only by the example or testimony of each one >>>>> that changes the people around, the system will mutate to a better one. >>>>> Even if formally does not change. And the contrary the better political >>>>> system will decay if the people do evil. No society will be free from >>>>> corruption since it is in human nature. >>>>> >>>>> In contrast the liberal sectarians of the ilustration and the french >>>>> revolution though that a political change would change fundamentally the >>>>> society for a better one without previously changing the people. That does >>>>> not work. >>>>> >>>>> After that, the socialist sectarians fo the comunist revolution though >>>>> that a violent social change would create a new Man. That didn't work too. >>>>> >>>>> What is next? the sectarian culturalist though.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> All of them are bad and cheap copies of the Christian conception of >>>>> salvation, escatology etc. >>>>> >>>>> But it is better to call things by his name. Democracy is an >>>>> ideological lie. There is no such thing as democracy. There is the law of >>>>> majority. and the result is not what the majority think, but what the >>>>> elite >>>>> -that they admire and obey- think. At the end the formal system does not >>>>> matter >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2015-01-10 19:40 GMT+01:00 John Clark <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:08 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything >>>>>> List <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> > Functioning anarchy would require a level of individual ethics that >>>>>>> does not yet exist >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No, it's socialism that won't work unless everybody is a saint, and >>>>>> that's why socialist are always observed to be in a constant state of >>>>>> righteous indignation; people aren't behaving as he wants then to behave >>>>>> and as they must behave for his system to function. In general I can only >>>>>> think of 3 ways to get anybody to do anything, force, love, or trade. I >>>>>> think most of us would agree that all else being equal force is the least >>>>>> desirable of the three. Love is very nice and it works for some things >>>>>> but >>>>>> any economic system that must rely on people loving each other is just >>>>>> not >>>>>> going to work. So unless somebody knows of a fourth way that I haven't >>>>>> thought of there is only one thing left. >>>>>> >>>>>> The farmer grows my food, the trucker moves my food and the grocer >>>>>> sells my food, I didn't make them do it and none of these people love me, >>>>>> yet the free market plunges them into a conspiracy to put food on my >>>>>> table. Capitalism can efficiently create wealth even if everybody is just >>>>>> looking out for themselves, I know of no other economic system that can >>>>>> do >>>>>> that. >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Alberto. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Alberto. >>> >>> -- >>> 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.
