Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 42   Go Down

Author Topic: Libertarian vs Anarchism  (Read 90447 times)

debra

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 287
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #45 on: August 04, 2002, 11:47:27 pm »


Jeez Debra...look what you've done! It's war!


Chaos, panic, and disorder...my job here is done. ;D
Logged
"Society has always honored its live conformists and its dead troublemakers."

Eddie_Bradford

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 567
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #46 on: August 04, 2002, 11:50:21 pm »

Yeah the thing is today war is really expensive and there just isn't a very high return on the old 'building and army and enslaving more people' strategy.  Also being highly armed at the local level would make if pretty much impossible to esablish any kind of control over society at the local level.  Of course they might want to blow us up and take our land and then we're screwed.
-Eddie
Logged

maestro

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 854
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #47 on: August 05, 2002, 01:39:56 am »

Unfortunately, just because there isn't a good strategic reason to fight an anarchist "state" _now_ doesn't mean that a reason won't appear.  For example, there are religious zealots who would be willing to fight and destroy any non-theistic state, if they ever obtained enough power.  There is also the possibility that the political ramifications of a secession and the resulting utopia (not being sarcastic, but near-utopia doesn't sound right) are so great as to make the existence of such a group a threat.

My point is that it is too great a risk to disarm ourselves on the assumption that political and social restrictions will protect us.  If we're wrong we're dead, and I don't like all-or-nothing bets when there are better options.
Logged

Freestatepatriot

  • FSP Participant
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 88
    • The Christian Independent
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #48 on: August 05, 2002, 06:13:25 am »

This is a question about anarchy.  Hope no one minds me jumping into the middle of your discussion like this.

Let's suppose that an anarchist zone were established.  Within this non-state territory, everything is privatized.  Schools, roads, sidwalks, busstops....EVERYTHING.  Who makes the rules?  Property owners.

So, the rules depend on whose property I'm on.  The rules change every time I step onto other property.

How am I ever going to keep track of all of the "laws"?

Thanks,

Adam G.
Logged

admin

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #49 on: August 05, 2002, 09:17:25 am »


This is a question about anarchy.  Hope no one minds me jumping into the middle of your discussion like this.

Let's suppose that an anarchist zone were established.  Within this non-state territory, everything is privatized.  Schools, roads, sidwalks, busstops....EVERYTHING.  Who makes the rules?  Property owners.

So, the rules depend on whose property I'm on.  The rules change every time I step onto other property.

How am I ever going to keep track of all of the "laws"?


How do you currently keep track of the laws of every city and county you enter?  If you go to Europe, how do you keep track of the laws of every country you visit?  Shopping malls and Wal-Marts can have their own rules when you are on their property as well.  Why is this different?

Charles
Logged

admin

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #50 on: August 05, 2002, 09:20:01 am »


Unfortunately, just because there isn't a good strategic reason to fight an anarchist "state" _now_ doesn't mean that a reason won't appear.  For example, there are religious zealots who would be willing to fight and destroy any non-theistic state, if they ever obtained enough power.  There is also the possibility that the political ramifications of a secession and the resulting utopia (not being sarcastic, but near-utopia doesn't sound right) are so great as to make the existence of such a group a threat.

My point is that it is too great a risk to disarm ourselves on the assumption that political and social restrictions will protect us.  If we're wrong we're dead, and I don't like all-or-nothing bets when there are better options.


By this logic, aren't 99% of the countries of the world just hanging out, ripe for destruction (not invasion)?  It sounds like you couldn't sleep at night if you lived in Switzerland.  Who knows who might level the country with ballistic missiles at any moment.

Charles
Logged

maestro

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 854
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #51 on: August 05, 2002, 10:14:03 am »

These nations survive currently due to lack of strategic value, but secondarily due to their alliance with other groups of nations.  A small nation _is_ ripe for the picking, and thus it must attempt to ally itself with similar nations.  It would seem to me that an anarchist state is unlikely to subject itself to any entangling alliances.

Switzerland is a bit of an exception due to its geography.  It is difficult to take, or even to destroy, due to the nature of the military defense.  Every citizen is a soldier trained in the use of automatic weapons and holding such a weapon and the ammo for it in a safebox at each home.  The streets are designed to be usable as airports and the hills have plenty of anti-air defenses.  They are almost inaccessible by ground, and can be ambushed if they try.  Switzerland is mostly immune (although not to WMD) due to this powerful defense, tied to a lack of obvious exploitable resources.

An anarchic zone _might_ have some of these defenses, but the geography is unlikely to be in its favor.  As such it would depend on the sociopolitical situation more than the defensive capability of the zone.

We've seen the government squash secessionist groups before (Waco for one)and by many accounts lie and get away with it.  They would be hard-pressed to act in such a way against a Free State, but I wouldn't put it past them if 20,000 anarchists seceded.
Logged

amyday

  • Guest
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #52 on: August 05, 2002, 12:17:56 pm »

Some thing I think you are missing is that these weapons and men you think we need to protect our country from attack by a foreign country, are the same weapons and men that our govenment is using to attack us(drug raids, waco, elian gonzalas, irs raids). Also this force is being used around the world to beat up other countries that don't behave the way our government deciedes they should. If I don't like what is being done by the government and don't wish to support it, and I stop paying taxes, they will send those defenders of our country to come take my money at the point of a gun.

It was also mentioned that we don't need income tax, that the government can tax imports and have sales tax. What if I want to sell something, and I don't want to send a portion of the money to government? It is my property, why should the government get some of it? If I don't send it in, the government will still come get its money(formally my money, but the god 'government' has decreed that it deserves a portion, and demands immediate obediance, at least the christian god waits until we die to inflict a punishment, our new god isn't that patient).
Logged

admin

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #53 on: August 05, 2002, 12:43:04 pm »

Regarding taxes:  Yeah, there are no good taxes.  No matter how the government goes about it, you pay.  If they charge tariffs, it means you have to pay more for those goods or more to a less efficient producer within the country.  

It's theft no matter what.

Charles
Logged

maestro

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 854
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #54 on: August 05, 2002, 02:27:22 pm »

Are you willing to risk having _no_ military, and minimally effective (against invaders) private arms in order to have no taxes, even those which can be avoided legitimately (by trading inside the country, for example)?

Even if you prefer to remove the military, do you also want to remove the police?  And would you _really_ prefer a privatized justice system where you _openly_ buy judges?  

This seems to be a hasty and incompletely described opinion.  As long as there is _any_ purpose served by government, there must be taxes in _some_ form.  Income taxes were seen as a bad idea by the constitutional government, which is why they only authorized the Federal government to tax trade (specifically international trade)

Income taxes are theft.  Sales taxes and tariffs are merely a limit on trade, which is not easily tied to theft.  it is a limit on the methods of trade, which is far more acceptible than income taxes, since it seems to me that _some_ degree of taxation is necessary for the security of a state.

Logged

maestro

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 854
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #55 on: August 05, 2002, 02:33:05 pm »


Some thing I think you are missing is that these weapons and men you think we need to protect our country from attack by a foreign country, are the same weapons and men that our govenment is using to attack us(drug raids, waco, elian gonzalas, irs raids). Also this force is being used around the world to beat up other countries that don't behave the way our government deciedes they should. If I don't like what is being done by the government and don't wish to support it, and I stop paying taxes, they will send those defenders of our country to come take my money at the point of a gun.


Just because the government uses the military for evil purposes (although the evil-ness is arguable in almost all cases) doesn't mean that there isn't a good use for that military weaponry.  The argument you are using here is hauntingly similar to the argument of gun control advocates who claim that the evil uses of gun justify the removal of said guns from society.  The reason for maintaining a military is that the time cost of mobilization from scratch is now too great to risk the time lost to do so.  Imagine trying to go from 0 weaponry to a reasonable fighting force.  We did this to some degree in both WW1 and WW2, and in both situations were technically inferior when we entered the war.  The level of technology needed to fight a war has grown, and the cost of losing a war has grown as well.  Operating without a standing army would be risking death now, and I am not one to enter a bar brawl unarmed.
Logged

admin

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #56 on: August 05, 2002, 05:53:08 pm »


Are you willing to risk having _no_ military, and minimally effective (against invaders) private arms in order to have no taxes, even those which can be avoided legitimately (by trading inside the country, for example)?


You can avoid gas tax by not driving your car.  You can avoid income tax by having no income and living from substinance farming.  Need I go on?

Quote

Even if you prefer to remove the military, do you also want to remove the police?  And would you _really_ prefer a privatized justice system where you _openly_ buy judges?  

This seems to be a hasty and incompletely described opinion.  As long as there is _any_ purpose served by government, there must be taxes in _some_ form.  Income taxes were seen as a bad idea by the constitutional government, which is why they only authorized the Federal government to tax trade (specifically international trade)


Honestly, you should read some Rothbard and Hoppe and stuff before you dismiss things out of hand.  Just because your mind can not presently imagine how government service could be provided by the private sector does not mean it's impossible.

Quote

Income taxes are theft.  Sales taxes and tariffs are merely a limit on trade, which is not easily tied to theft.  it is a limit on the methods of trade, which is far more acceptible than income taxes, since it seems to me that _some_ degree of taxation is necessary for the security of a state.


I know.  I don't like the state, they seem to mostly harass me and take my money while providing next to nothing in return.  Why do I have to pay?
Logged

admin

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #57 on: August 05, 2002, 05:56:24 pm »

Why are we going to war again?  You never explained why an enemy army would feel the need to bomb our cities with ballistic missiles.  Did you?  A ground invasion would be tough against an armed society.

Charles



Some thing I think you are missing is that these weapons and men you think we need to protect our country from attack by a foreign country, are the same weapons and men that our govenment is using to attack us(drug raids, waco, elian gonzalas, irs raids). Also this force is being used around the world to beat up other countries that don't behave the way our government deciedes they should. If I don't like what is being done by the government and don't wish to support it, and I stop paying taxes, they will send those defenders of our country to come take my money at the point of a gun.


Just because the government uses the military for evil purposes (although the evil-ness is arguable in almost all cases) doesn't mean that there isn't a good use for that military weaponry.  The argument you are using here is hauntingly similar to the argument of gun control advocates who claim that the evil uses of gun justify the removal of said guns from society.  The reason for maintaining a military is that the time cost of mobilization from scratch is now too great to risk the time lost to do so.  Imagine trying to go from 0 weaponry to a reasonable fighting force.  We did this to some degree in both WW1 and WW2, and in both situations were technically inferior when we entered the war.  The level of technology needed to fight a war has grown, and the cost of losing a war has grown as well.  Operating without a standing army would be risking death now, and I am not one to enter a bar brawl unarmed.
Logged

maestro

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 854
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #58 on: August 05, 2002, 11:31:33 pm »

The Islamists (term for violent, extremist factions of Islam) would be happy to rain destruction upon the infidels if it was feasible.  They are an example of a military force (fortunately not powerful at this time) which will destroy for an idea instead of for profit.  And it would matter little what forces were on the ground, since they would simply wipe their opponents from the face of the earth if it was possible.  

At this _particular_ point in time, a war seems unlikely, but I am not willing to take the chance that such a situation will remain stable.  Periods of peace are historically very fragile, and a period of chaos will not bode well for an anarchist territory for the reasons stated previously.  If you are wrong, we die for nothing.  If I am wrong, we still live with significant freedom while maintaining a small government to protect our rights internally and our lives from external threats.

I have given an explanation for my argument, now you need to explain a reasonable method for privatization of the governmental responsibilities I listed above.  If you believe that Rothbard and Hoppe make the best explanation, please give me some references and details and preferably access to their arguments in whole.  
Logged

Doc

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
  • A Demonstrated Aptitude for Reasonable Mayhem
    • Deuce of Clubs
Re:Libertarian vs Anarchism
« Reply #59 on: August 06, 2002, 04:29:17 am »


Chaos, panic, and disorder...my job here is done. ;D


Even so, here's another log of chaos on the fire:

Sobran's latest concerns war, anarchism, and obedience ("We don’t need the state to force us to cooperate; we would do it spontaneously, without coercion. The force-system we call the state is worse than superfluous. It interferes with and frustrates the natural urge to cooperate; at worst, it embitters human relations. The paradigm of state-behavior — massive organized force — is war.")

http://www.sobran.com/columns/020723.shtml
Logged
http://www.deuceofclubs.com -- A Demonstrated Aptitude for Reasonable Mayhem
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 42   Go Up