Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Let's say a "free world" is inevitable. How do you predict it comes about?

rated by 0 users
This post has 12 Replies | 4 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat Posted: Fri, Sep 28 2012 10:34 AM

Is the Libertarian's attempts to try and shrink government (to a point where society can transition to anarchy) necessary? Should we just wait out the impending collapse of statism? 

It's the "transition period" that I fear the most. I have no idea how this shit is gonna' go down. It could very well come out of a very bloody mess. 

I'm scurred. 

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 10:45 AM

I think the existing statist arrangement has already passed the point of no return, so I see no point in trying to "work within the system". So instead I'm simply trying to reach out to as many people as I can on a more direct and personal level.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 10:54 AM

Yeah, that's legit. I remember Molyneux saying that most action taken against the state (as you said to "work within the system") are pretty futile, and that peaceful parenting and personal interaction is what's most important. 

I'm still interested in how you see this all playing out, and by "this" I mean the demise of statism. 

  • | Post Points: 35
Not Ranked
Posts 41
Points 980
jordan161 replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 11:17 AM

TronCat:

Yeah, that's legit. I remember Molyneux saying that most action taken against the state (as you said to "work within the system") are pretty futile, and that peaceful parenting and personal interaction is what's most important. 

Do you agree with Molyneaux's concept of peaceful parenting? I honestly fail to see the connection between parenting and political ideology.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 11:39 AM

Autolykos:

I think the existing statist arrangement has already passed the point of no return, so I see no point in trying to "work within the system". So instead I'm simply trying to reach out to as many people as I can on a more direct and personal level.

Ever thought about writing a book?

Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 11:46 AM
 
 

TronCat:

I'm still interested in how you see this all playing out, and by "this" I mean the demise of statism.

There will need to be, first, a vanguard of libertarians. For all intents and purposes, that's us, here, now.

These need to be ready to take action and fill the gap should the prevailing system falter. As an example, Czarist Russia failed because of economic woes and war failure. The vanguard of socialists suggested he abdicate, and he surprised them by agreeing to do so :P

We all certainly will agree that the current system is doomed to reach crisis and failure due to the internal contradiction present in the system. When it does so there will be a new receptiveness to libertarian ideals and ideas.

Until that point we have to popularize as strongly as possible.

You guys know I've been pushing a seastead concept and am planning to start one up. But actually that idea I consider win/win whether it succeeds or fails in the long term, because if it succeeds then we win a huge victory for libertarianism and a great deal of attention to the idea as well as a new place to live in freedom, and if it does not succeed and the US cracks down on it, we still gain a great deal of attention and press to the concept of a free society, thus advancing the goal of popularizing these ideas.

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 11:54 AM

"Do you agree with Molyneaux's concept of peaceful parenting? I honestly fail to see the connection between parenting and political ideology."

 

I agree with peaceful parenting. It's not so much that there's a connection to "political ideology", but rather the ethical, moral, and philosophical perspectives that develop a person's view of society and how it works.  

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Female
Posts 260
Points 4,015
Lady Saiga replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 12:29 PM

I think it's awfully sanguine of anyone to imagine statism will go away anytime soon.  I don't think that's remotely likely until the world's languished under an outrageously oppressive centralized world government for awhile.  Meantime, I imagine it'll be possible to set up an anarcho-capitalist venture offworld, so my advice to your descendants is to get out of town.

I wouldn't hold my breath in the meantime.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 781
Points 13,130
Minarchist replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 12:53 PM

Should we just wait out the impending collapse of statism?

Collapse of statism or collapse of existing States? I don't see any evidence that statism is collapsing, quite the contrary, it's expanding at a breathtaking pace. The case for the collapse of certain existing States (or at least their radical transformation) is better, but why wouldn't they just be replaced with new States? The idea that the collapse of a State yields a stateless society runs contrary to all historical experience.

Is the Libertarian's attempts to try and shrink government (to a point where society can transition to anarchy) necessary?

I think it's the only viable option. Pushing the existing State over a cliff and hoping a stateless society emerges from the chaos is a crazy gamble IMO. The same with violent revolution. In both cases I think we're much more likely to end up with an even more oppressive State than with a free society.

I'm scurred.

Don't be scurred. :  )

Do what you can to promote liberty, and as for the rest: che sara sara.

apiarius delendus est, ursus esuriens continendus est
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 2:29 PM
 
 

The news today should be heartening to all of us :)

Spain Reveals Sweeping Budget Cuts to Fight Crisis

"Spain announced a crisis budget for 2013 based mostly on spending cuts on Thursday in what many see as an effort to pre-empt the likely conditions of an international bailout.

Ministry budgets were slashed by 8.9 percent for next year and public sector wages frozen for a third year as Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy battles to trim one of the euro zone's biggest deficits."

They've been forced to enact a libertarian idea, reduction of gov spending (to the point of elimination hopefully one day) without any libertarians pushing for it, haha. Contradictions inherent in their system indeed.

 

 

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,612
Points 29,515

Should we just wait out the impending collapse of statism?

It is highly unrealistic to think that if one state fails and converts to anarchy that other states will not take over the territory.  We can already see that States act as influential powers of the private market so I'd assume that people in the ancap society would eventually succumb to the temptation of making money or acquiring power through a foriegn state.

It's the "transition period" that I fear the most. I have no idea how this shit is gonna' go down. It could very well come out of a very bloody mess.

Relax.  If the transition from statism to anarchy will happen it won't be until after there is a world state established and it fails everywhere all at once.

"The Fed does not make predictions. It makes forecasts..." - Mustang19
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 28 2012 2:47 PM
 
 

Aristophanes:

It is highly unrealistic to think that if one state fails and converts to anarchy that other states will not take over the territory.

We know that if Pakistan's gov fails that the US is ready to move in and caretake nuke sites >_>

Aristophanes:

It's the "transition period" that I fear the most. I have no idea how this shit is gonna' go down. It could very well come out of a very bloody mess.

Relax.  If the transition from statism to anarchy will happen it won't be until after there is a world state established and it fails everywhere all at once.

No way. I refuse to accept the idea that we should or even have to wait for a goddamn world government to come about and then fail. That is giving victory to the enemy in advance.

No, we should establish a beach-head free territory, as a seastead or w/e, show people what a free society in practice would actually look like, which will have the effect of removing all their fears and the stupid knee-jerk reactions to the idea of anarcho-capitalism people routinely spout without any deep thought about it.

Then, by means of the massive success of such a society, provoke the people's of the world to envy and by that effect change long-term.

It was, after all, envy of the British towards American clipper-ships that finally forced them to deregulate their shipping and go on to massive worldwide trade success. That model exists.

Where we fail right now is that we have no real-world experience to point to and say, "see, it's working right here, right now."

This is what we must change.

If we have to wait for world government than nothing but WWIII will change that despotism. Allowing any world body to legitimately claim worldwide jurisdiction is a travesty for freedom, and we've got to turn the tide before that happens.

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,612
Points 29,515

Good luck with all that.  People on here can't even be bothered to actually figure out what is going on without making wild assumptions about the "people at the top."  Do you think anyone is going to get on their side?  Praxeology is all well and good, in the mainstream they call it "decision theory," but a priori conspiricizing won't win the hearts and minds of those who are needed to stand up to central banking.

Go seastead.  Maybe I'll come check it out.

No one is stopping anyone from doing it.  Well, maybe Poseidon.

"The Fed does not make predictions. It makes forecasts..." - Mustang19
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (13 items) | RSS