Effective Society (my research blog)

The background of anarcho-capitalists

2015-08-23T10:13:00.000-07:00

The following is in response to "Isn't anarcho-capitalism a contradiction?" However, I found I was answering a different issue so I decided not to post it.

Thanks to /u/AnCom9 and /u/figgycal for some recognition of potentially murky waters with respect to the term "property". I'd like to expand this a bit, because even Proudhon used "property" in a positive way:

"Where shall we find a power capable of counter-balancing the... State? There is none other than property..." (found at http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html )

"Property" rights in (my US) culture may be looked at either way:

1) It is a weapon of control or self-centered accumulation.

2) It is a foundation of respect for the possessions of others.

This second viewpoint is the viewpoint of most ("good") people around me; our education system expands property to an unnatural application in social organizations, so it's hard to get people to draw the appropriate lines and value that idea of possession rather than the absolute ownership of shared resources, but that foundation isn't a bad start. It's very hard for me to understand and apply... it takes real focus to adjust our conceptual models.

BTW, one thought on that education: it's thought-provoking to fight property in private conversations, but it's mostly unhelpful to just declare that property is totally evil in a one-sided forum without the back-and-forth. (... for people with my background, of course. Always a caveat!)

I work in the computer-programming arena where there is a strong sentiment that we should all be rewarded for our contributions (as opposed to rent-seeking). This even extends into the community (of makers) where we want to share freely the fruits of our labor so that others can benefit. So I believe the underlying sentiment is there, and people just need the extended education about the problems extending these ideas to capital.

In short: anarcho-capitalism has many things wrong, but most anarcho-capitalists (with whom I interact) are, at heart, sympathetic to the the large-scale capitalist problems while dedicated to a respect for the small-scale freedoms... and motivated to help find solutions.

"I just do not trust other people."

2014-03-22T20:21:00.004-07:00

Synopsis: If you believe we need government to watch the other people you don't trust, you're giving extra authority to exactly those other people... and, worse, their bureaucratic organization.

Talking with my brother about getting rid of the state, he said he just couldn't go along because "I just do not trust other people." (Or maybe he said that "people are stupid and selfish"... yeah, that sounds more like him.) I have a typical response but forgot to use it: I'm much the same as you, and that's exactly why I don't want to give extra authority to other people... specifically lawmakers, and the military and police they control. To me, it is much scarier to have a small set of people who have monopoly power over a police force and taxing authority and water management.

Isn't it much safer to have everyone watching out for everyone else? It goes against many of our cherished ideals of a benevolent leadership. We should be able to make the right kinds of laws and put the right kind of people in charge to make good decisions! Everyone (including myself) believes that we know some of the right things to do and we have good ideas about things that should work well for everyone, and I think that leads us to have faith in rulers. But the fact is that absolute, codified laws cannot cover all situations and human conditions... and the intended beneficial consequences that are claimed by politicians mask an iceberg of costs and unintended consequences that are hard to see but which drag down so many other parts of our communities.

And history has shown us how even the American government with the most noble of founders and foundational concepts can easily be corrupted, in every generation... and not only do we give improper power over our lives to corruptible people, but more critically we see how the system becomes self-serving to the point where bureaucratic incentives do not serve the public good.

How do we get a voluntary society?

2012-09-23T20:47:00.001-07:00

In my previous post, I put the word "let's" in the title, as if the achievement of anarchy were something that we could do in any of our lifetimes. However, when I think of the two routes for our future, the outlook is grim:

If we have a quick collapse, I imagine people are going to want to set up local governments and gather armies to preemptively "defend" their homeland and rights (eg. to water) because they're afraid for their future. (In contrast, members of a voluntary society will depend on persuasion rather than force to get what they want.)
If we have a gradual decline in central authority, the outlook could be better because people will slowly have to get used to working out their own solutions, but as I look at the trend in America (and other nations) it seems that people are choosing more authoritarianism the more they feel uncertain, so they spiral down the whirlpool of feeding the beast.

Basically, people's biggest argument to me is that "people cannot handle it," and I think they're not far off, but not for the reasons they think: people would do better than we suppose, but most are afraid of the idea that someone's not "in charge" or "doing something" and so they'll try to put up another government... even the ones that are self-sufficient would join the gang -- not because people wouldn't handle it but because of their fear that other people wouldn't handle it.

So maybe we'll never get there. But I've gotta try.

Basically, it'll be a lot of work to show examples and change the majority mindset over time. (Hm... I wonder if society will stay stable enough for these ideas to propagate! Well, I've got to act as if they will.) Seems I've got company in this opinion: here are calls for "gradualism" and for "methodology (not creeds)". (Although I, like Rothbard, would gladly jump to the final goal if given the chance.)

So let's get pragmatic: let's spread around the activities that'll help us get there. Join me there, and I'll join with you.

Let's Achieve Anarchy. (Seriously!)

2012-09-09T19:27:00.001-07:00

OK, I'm just going to come out and say that I'm an anarchist. I don't know that we'll be able to get to a stateless (ie. governmentless) society in my lifetime, but I'm now convinced that it's not only possible but actually desirable: I believe that a world of anarchy -- meaning a world where there is no hierarchy of government force and all associations are voluntary -- will be overall a better world for us. This conclusion has been a long time coming; many of you know that I've been pretty libertarian for many years now... I didn't seriously think that a society was possible without a government... but the more I study and look around the more I see that most everyone would benefit. It may require smart people with good plans to pave the way, plus a lot of dedication and attention to the cause and a ton of luck... so I'm going to do all I can to help everyone see the benefits of voluntarism and the evils of "the state".

Let me reiterate something: anarchy doesn't mean chaos or no social order; political anarchy just means no enforced political hierarchy. We'll still have police, courts, roads, welfare and all kinds of other things that government currently does... they just won't be owned by government and backed by aggression... they'll be done they way they've always evolved: naturally, and appropriate to the societal conditions. I know, you may be worried that those with the biggest guns will own everything and the environment will be trashed, so read on.

Let me give the best argument I have for anarchy: "look around."

In addition to the philosophy (and there's to plenty to study), I will continually gather arguments:

There are more and more P2P, voluntary, contractual, community, distributed solutions popping up all over the world: use RSS to subscribe to my bookmarks (see past ones here) or follow my future posts
There is plenty of evidence every day that governments at every level oppress 99.99% of the people for the benefit of the politically well-connected: use RSS to subscribe to my bookmarks (see past ones here)

Just a quick note to my friends who may lean toward one side or other of the major US political parties:

Republicans: I believe most of you value liberty, so keep your eyes open for evidence that the large corporations and large bureaucracies have the most access and favors from our politicians, so they are creating a system that weakens individual and small-scale power.
Democrats: Since you value civil liberties, watch for how government force and policy can be changed at a whim; and since you value social good, watch for how the big corporate, political, and military players are always getting their own policies injected into the process.

Government is actually our enemy. My hope is to kindly but directly demonstrate it to everyone, with philosophy, with real solutions, and by living it more and more in my life.

Cheers!