Anarcho-capitalists, I'm calling you out.... (1 Viewer)

[volition]

Samsunghugh

Have a look at this: But Wouldn't Warlords Take Over?

Also, look at what is currently in power - A monopoly government. In fact, Max Weber defined the state as the legitimated monopoly on violence.

 

[samsunghugh]

Firstly, I will agree that our society is far from perfect. Secondly, I will now become more specific in my argument. My fear lies not in the purchase of armies, weapons etc but in the formation of a society, which could be controlled by some head to do object x etc i.e. the collapse of the anarchist section of the society because I do believe (though have limited evidence) that people will want to form some sort of larger society and that people are also greedy and will manipulate others for their own ends.

 

[volition]

Samsunghugh, your concerns are certainly justified, but have a look at what you're saying:

My fear lies not in the purchase of armies, weapons etc but in the formation of a society, which could be controlled by some head to do object x

Is this situation you're describing not the situation we're in now? In an AC society, at least if people want to go to war, they have to pay for it themselves. Under this society, some people (the politicians/the 'head') decide to go to war, and everybody else pays for it with their money and lives.

I do believe (though have limited evidence) that people will want to form some sort of larger society

If people want to form their own societies, that is fine by me - my argument is specifically about being able to opt out of those rules. ie. I have no problem if you want to live under a government, my problem is when you start imposing those rules on me.

greedy and will manipulate others for their own ends.

Look at what happens now with rent seeking behaviour and special interests who all lobby the government to get subsidies or favourable legislation. So clearly the government even fails at stopping people being "greedy and manipulating", since it fails prey to corruption and bribery.

The biggest problem with what the government does, is the 'services' it purports to provide, are done on a monopoly basis. If we had true free markets, there would be competition allowed in these areas, but unfortunately there is no competition and therefore the government departments have no real incentive to do a good job. In fact, the incentive can often be to do a bad job so that they will get more funding. What kind of private business can just fail and then expect more money for it?

 

[samsunghugh]

If people want to form their own societies, that is fine by me - my argument is specifically about being able to opt out of those rules. ie. I have no problem if you want to live under a government, my problem is when you start imposing those rules on me.

This is my main point. That while YOU may feel that if someone imposes rules on you you can opt out etc, what about those that do not realise. That is, I wonder about the practicality of such a society (though I know support for this may be hard to come by due to lack of such a societies existence). Perhaps more importantly, I wonder how well (if i can use such a vague term) you expect such a society to function.

 

[volition]

samsunghugh I'm not clear on what you mean "what about those that do not realise".

As for the practicality element I argue in favour of anarchism being better than the state. For example, the government schemes to 'help the poor' actually don't work or are rendered useless by other aspects of government policy. eg. inflation and minimum wage laws rob the poor of their chance to better their own lot in life.