Political Theory

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

AJ — Mon, 21 Oct 2013 11:19:23 GMT

Bill:
Anarchists just want to be left alone and not governed by others.

You can have governance without government. You will always be subject to the preferences of others if you want to enjoy the benefits of society and the division of labor, but that doesn't mean there needs to be centralized control magnifying and distorting those preferences to outlandish degrees.

See: http://mises.org/journals/scholar/hasnas.pdf

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Bill — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 02:20:50 GMT

Conflict gives rise to states which ultimately crumble into anarchy as they decay at which time conflict gives rise to new states. It's just the way it is

I'd say rise to anarchy and crumble into states. Unless violence and coercion is something you rise to.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Bill — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 02:34:13 GMT

Anarchy fails because it's not organized. Anarchists just want to be left alone and not governed by others. When a group comes in looking to loot and pillage be it a street gang warlord or government. Anarchist are taken over. Even if they out number their foe they can't win without becoming one of them.

I'll give you an example. I've deer hunted the same 10 thousand acres since I was a kid. Back then the same timber companies owned the land. They'd charge a fee to free range cattle but there were no posted signs and no gates just cattle guards. Now they lease the land to hunting clubs. There's about 10 different "clubs" on the same land. I just quit my 4th club. They're all the same just a bunch of guys from somewhere else making up a bunch of rules for someone else to follow.

I believe the world is full of anarchists they may be imprisoned by their governments but they never fail unless they become one of them

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Minarchist — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 23:46:39 GMT

So they do....weird.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Smiling Dave — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:04:09 GMT

Not only does it work, the same user names and passwords work.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

AJ — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 08:42:06 GMT

Does the forum work again?! Testing...

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Live_Free_Or_Die — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 13:07:05 GMT

Factors raising the level of personal and institutional interconnectivity include:

Language: spoken, then written, followed by standardization and then the current push for English as a global language, not to mention economic advancement (see below) enabling education (see below again) and thereby increasing literacy rates. Now the Internet is vigorously boosting all of these language factors.

Contract law conventions: these have developed in common law over time - I'll leave the details to someone more knowledgeable

Market interactions and the (limited) recognition of the value of unhindered free exchange, especially after Adam Smith

Greater value of reputation: a result of the rise of free-market capitalism (and of course language)

Greater power of social sanctions, thanks to several of the above

I assert reputation is already highly valued. The manifestation of it in the present legal system is status or condition of a man in relation to his rank among society. Most statuatory penalties lowers the status of ones citizenship estate justifying the imposition or penalties or santions. The present legal system extensively relies on reputation in this light. In addition to legal uses of reputation credit reports, medical histories, driving records, code violation histories, google search histories, and all other manner of reputation indicators, both public and private, are in wide use.

I would also assert the extensive use of "in rem" proceedings is an extraordinary social sanction as the very definition of the admiralty jurisdiction includes a jurisdiction outside a country such as a jurisdiction a free and independent people are not ordinarily subject to. I would further assert changing the status of an estate without regard to the ownership of said estate or the owners rights in the estate is a great power of social sanction.

I personally do not view the present legal mechanisms to value reputation or exercise power of social sanctions as objectionable per se but I do consider the lack of full and honest disclosure of these legal mechanisms highly objectionable.

Point being .... transparency might be a worthy addition to your enumerations.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

AJ — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 06:57:28 GMT

I'm working from a smartphone these days, but anything I post may be freely reposted anywhere with or without attribution and without permission. The same goes for any edited or derivative works, etc.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Kelvin Silva — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 05:00:04 GMT

You should post this on voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Torsten — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 11:24:25 GMT

What's anarchy, would that even exist as a norm, even when there was no government? Assume two people being on a small island, would there be no rules sorted between them? I think there would.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

AJ — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 11:51:40 GMT

This outstanding article on LewRockwell.com explains how technology and social organization can and will alter each of the IDEA aspects. A brief article and a must-read! http://lewrockwell.com/orig13/matson-k1.1.1.html

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

Torsten — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:12:21 GMT

The cycle goes like this. In the beginning there is self-defense. In order to improve their security humans enter into protection relationships with noblemen. Noblemen obtain a monopoly on this relationship and become kings. Kings abuse their monopoly until this monopoly is replaced with some form of common monopoly (a republic). Common monopoly becomes totally irrational and ruins the civilization unless the kingdom can be restored before all traces of the ancien régime have been destroyed. Collapsed civilization returns to self-defense and proto-monarchy (feudalism).

One should add that except for feudalism, which is for most of the part a vertical relationship, there were other forms of social/political organisation in the middle ages as well (guilds, "Genossenschaften"), which were more horizontal.
Political theories of the middle age - Gierke, Otto Friedrich von, 1841-1921

If something like that can be revived, I don't know. But I think one can learn very many things from this, which will become quite useful in the future.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

cab21 — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 05:48:21 GMT

i think if joe agrees to that bob owns the piano if joe smokes, and joe smokes, then joe is initiating voilence if he tries to stop bob from access to his property. bob is now the owner, joe interfering with bob ownership is agression. it's this whole thing about trying to weasle out of contracts and agreements that can play a part in making things not work. if people lose, then offer exuses about how they don't want to honer contracts, then where is society? responsibility ought to mean reasponsibility. now bob might let joe keep the piano and just choose it's not worth the hassle and fight, but it's joe that makes it a fight and doe's not respect agreements. word need to be word, paper or oral, honesty and responsibility for consequences are needed for order. how much does bob need to babysit joe?let it be a good lesson for joe on how to make agreements in the future if joe is not happy with the consequences, but don't call bob violent or agressive for wanting what he thought was mutualy agreed to . just as nonagression is good, not trying to weasle out is also good.

we need trust or things break down.

bob and joe can be friends and work out conditions to return the piano, if that would break them it does not seem a great relationship to begin with.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

PeaceRequiresAnarchy — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 05:35:43 GMT

Specifically I would like to dispute your claim that anarchy doesn't work, but I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "doesn't work" so it's possible that we are actually in agreement already.

Re: Why Anarchy Fails

PeaceRequiresAnarchy — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 05:28:46 GMT

jodiphour, what do you mean by "doesn't work"?