I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Why wouldn't any of those DROs just go: "Oh, hey, we will keep this money, you just committed a crime."?
And why would the DROs equip themselves with armies capable of controlling a vast population that likely contains fuckloads of armed libertarians ready to die?
That would be seen in their fees. Not to forget they would likely audit one another.
Would the armies get raised without any of the soldiers bothering to mention about it?
I guess it would be nice to be the king but it doesn't sound like a good investment to become the slave master of ruins.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Because money is only a veil over the more fundamental human urge for power and glory.
In the past, people were more well-armed than they are today and that only exacerbated the problem by creating a pool of conscripts ready to fight for their duke's glory.** People act on irrational instincts that evolved hundreds of thousands of years before we learned to mint coins.
** A king of England famously banned a football-like sport so that young men could practice archery instead.
Last edited by xerx; 05-30-2014 at 12:50 AM.
With billions of dollars at your disposal, isn't there better ways to buy power and glory rather than to become the king of a smoldering ruin?
You still didn't answer all of my questions like:
Why wouldn't the DROs just keep the money?
How would the armies necessary for enslavement of an armed population get raised without anyone knowing?
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Don't forget to watch out for those rich people buying oil tankers and crashing them into tourist beaches full of bikini wearing liberal art students and dolphins because lack of socialism and government... Yolo.
No. Amassing wealth doesn't buy you glory, infamy or the recognition of your deeds by posterity. Commanding vast armies is the ultimate power trip and the summit of human competition. The only reason this happens less now is because the state bureaucracy has taken on the role of alpha male and established a kind of pax bureaucratica.
If rational, non-intrusive accumulation of property was the driver of human motivation, we'd have been living in a libertarian society for all of our history.
Not sure what DROs have to do with it.You still didn't answer all of my questions like:
Why wouldn't the DROs just keep the money?
From the people themselves. The common wo/man isn't a radical individualist mistrustful of authority and is often ready to sacrifice for their community.How would the armies necessary for enslavement of an armed population get raised without anyone knowing?
Last edited by xerx; 05-30-2014 at 03:18 AM.
Dispute resolution organizations.
So why wouldn't anybody do anything when somebody is building an army? Would it be trained and equipped in secrecy?From the people themselves.
But a common libertarian who has moved to and invested in the society is. Just like Minutemen.The common wo/man isn't a radical individualist mistrustful of authority and is often ready to sacrifice for their community.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
And? Libertarians are like 15% of the human population. They're a mutation.
We're going around in circles. Aqua, Have you ever picked up a history book? Did you read up on all the wars and the men marching gleefully to their deaths for the service of their country / god / whatever? Have you taken a look at how propaganda can be used to exploit human irrationality to serve powerful actors? Please do; it's fairly basic knowledge.
Law enforcement by the state has structured society so that competition over money, rather than power, is the only means left available to achieve status.
Last edited by xerx; 05-30-2014 at 03:17 AM.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
If a suitable place for building a stateless society emerges, it will likely be in an area where there weren't a lot of residents before or it will be an area that sees the prosperity that liberty brings. In any case, a lot of libertarians will want to move there and many of the residents will probably like their vision seeing the improved quality of living.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
nvm
Hmm, I appreciate your respect. If only governments would let people secede with their own land. Well, I hope this happens within our lifetime.
The Seasteading Institute tries to build a floating city made of waterborne vehicles that can try out different sort of solutions for the optimal society. People who don't like the rules of the particular section can just move away by unhooking their boats and moving out. Also makes it easier to move together with your SOs and breaking up with them.![]()
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Using a poor, violent, starving country as a positive example is a lot more unlikelier than using it as a good example. My use of it was to prove a couple of points which I specifically clarified whereas people who argue against libertarians use it as a general argument how stateless societies generally just suck, not taking into account the prior rape, murder, theft and other fuckfest going around in the name of "scientific socialism". It's a wonder that they are getting back up at such a quick rate. Usually a history of war among citizenry will be seen in the crimes and even those who return "bring the war back to home".
Another aspect of states that I don't particularly like is war. Who the fuck would pay for it if they didn't have to? Some people are probably eager to go to war, but only after the costly propaganda. For every song about some supposedly heroic murderer in an uniform there's a thousand puddles of blood, piss and semen that seep in the corners of the shellshocked minds. All that waste just to advance the aims of a few tyrants and their friends.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
What does this mean?
Again, I mostly see people respond to libertarians praising Somalia and pointing out that it is not a good example. I am not sure what you mean by the bolded part.My use of it was to prove a couple of points which I specifically clarified whereas people who argue against libertarians use it as a general argument how stateless societies generally just suck, not taking into account the prior rape, murder, theft and other fuckfest going around in the name of "scientific socialism". It's a wonder that they are getting back up at such a quick rate. Usually a history of war among citizenry will be seen in the crimes and even those who return "bring the war back to home".
I am in total agreement. So are most combat veterans I know for obvious reasons.Another aspect of states that I don't particularly like is war. Who the fuck would pay for it if they didn't have to? Some people are probably eager to go to war, but only after the costly propaganda. For every song about some supposedly heroic murderer in an uniform there's a thousand puddles of blood, piss and semen that seep in the corners of the shellshocked minds. All that waste just to advance the aims of a few tyrants and their friends.
Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.
― Anais Nin
The cases in history where something approaching but still distant from libertarianism hardly leap out as superior to democracies. Such societies have either been rural with people far between with inconsistent justice, or they have been states ruled with semi-benovolent rulers that through luck the citizens are fortunate have and where the success and prosperity of the state has been linked with the degree of its military competitiveness with other states.
If this example was applied to individuals, which I think it can be with easy justification, it would mean you would either "benefit" from being isolated and taking cares of your own services, or you "benefit" via out-gunning other people in a densely populated area with no say about how resources should be managed at either a local or a global scale, unless you happen to own many square miles of the planet. Of course there is a reason why this sounds exactly like a description of anarchy. If you wish to imagine that you can live in a significantly decentralised way like Switzerland or through some tribal or familial system of order as with the Xeer code...you have already moved away from libertarianism in its pure form and attempted to co-opt a culture that is centuries old and simply does not apply to you. When the Swiss have a culture of neutrality for example, that is a collective mindset that has arisen over a long period of time, and is fairly strongly part of a group identity that existed before you were born. In a true libertarian "society", you simply would not be born with those ties. Similarly, with a tribal or familial based codes, they are ingrained into the culture of a group and do not arise from individual-focused people.
If a libertarian state of one did exist against all the tyranny of democracies, would it be libertarianism if that individual acted against the interests of everybody else? If there was some natural law somehow that libertarians not act against the interest of others, how exactly would that be policed without it being a tyranny or a democracy? And...after all that, how would this be of net benefit for everybody and how would the average individual be better off ?
Wikisocion
Socionics Links
Enneagram Links
A Socionics Test
Other Socionics Tests
Socionics Test Rating Project
Socionics types and Music Preference
Personality Traits of American Cities / Counties
Interesting Psychology Articles
Personality Traits Correlations
A Biased Reading List
Google Scholar Alerts
Type movie suggestions
Random Pictures Thread
Interesting Articles Thread
Best Countries To Emigrate To, Possibly
There is not a lot of good to point out in Somalia. People want to use examples of greatness, not examples of greatness in comparison to prior. Though the empiristic method can easily show the correlation between a use of a method and the improvement of a situation in comparison to a control group, civilizations are not a large sample and very complex.
After Somalia's state fell, people had to rise from nothing (no savings due to massive inflation and poorly orchestrated central planned farming) and lots of those people had experienced systematic violence around them while being helpless. These people, especially orphans, tend to lead a life of crime. To be honest, though, anyone struch down can only go up and usually at a good rate. I'm no expert on the rise of fallen societies so the bolded part was moot.
If stateless society is a possibility and a better one, we are looking at a world without massive warfare. Not to say that violence would be got rid of since it's only an utopia in comparison to the world of states just like world without practically any slavery was an utopia in a world with slavery for thousands of years.
It's definitely an idea worth examining and I'm happy to try to provide answers about how it may look like, if people would ask. Sadly, they rarely do, but instead will dismiss my ideas how a tyranny would replace what anarchists hoped to be a better quality of living for almost everyone.
Although I may be wrong about all of this but how it feels like is that I've walked across a desert and found an oasis and people will claim that it was a mirage and won't examine the reality behind my statement.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
I'm not sure which instances you are talking about since liberty is fairly new. Well, new after the spread of agriculture. Also, I'd like to point out that democracy doesn't exclude a state close to liberty, like the US of the 18th century. Of course, democracy has a tendency to kinda bribe the voters and everyone likes "free" stuff.
This starts to sound that anarchy is culturless and without rules. Please correct me, if that's not what you meant.If this example was applied to individuals, which I think it can be with easy justification, it would mean you would either "benefit" from being isolated and taking cares of your own services, or you "benefit" via out-gunning other people in a densely populated area with no say about how resources should be managed at either a local or a global scale, unless you happen to own many square miles of the planet. Of course there is a reason why this sounds exactly like a description of anarchy. If you wish to imagine that you can live in a significantly decentralised way like Switzerland or through some tribal or familial system of order as with the Xeer code...you have already moved away from libertarianism in its pure form and attempted to co-opt a culture that is centuries old and simply does not apply to you.
I don't think that Swiss culture or any culture is neutral nor that libertarianists have to be very individualistic. All human's anarchists (adhere NAP) when it comes to our relationships. We don't rape our lovers nor do we force our friends to hang out with us and most of my interactions with the bartenders are non-coercive.When the Swiss have a culture of neutrality for example, that is a collective mindset that has arisen over a long period of time, and is fairly strongly part of a group identity that existed before you were born. In a true libertarian "society", you simply would not be born with those ties. Similarly, with a tribal or familial based codes, they are ingrained into the culture of a group and do not arise from individual-focused people.
Yes, as long as he doesn't initiate the use of force against anybody or their property. (Btw, don't want to nitpick but I want to clarify that I don't think that a libertarian state is optimal since I am an anarchist due to my belief that the states tend to grow in size as much as they can.)If a libertarian state of one did exist against all the tyranny of democracies, would it be libertarianism if that individual acted against the interests of everybody else?
Finally, I start to see questions in this thread!If there was some natural law somehow that libertarians not act against the interest of others, how exactly would that be policed without it being a tyranny or a democracy? And...after all that, how would this be of net benefit for everybody and how would the average individual be better off ?
I'd rather call them rules but whatever. Basically the idea is that you hire one of the dispute resolution organizations (DRO) to protect you and secure your transactions, the latter will probably provide an additional fee. Whenever someone aggresses you or violates a contract, your DRO contacts their DRO. If the other DRO thinks that their client has violated you, they will demand a reparation from their client. Your DRO can also pay you recompensation and inform a credit rating agency (CRA) along with the violator's DRO about the violator's untrustworthiness. This will increase fees for transactions made with him.
However, if they think your claim of their client's violation was false, they hire an independent third party arbiter which both of your DROs submit to agree with. In order to be efficient, DROs will design the protocol by which they will align with one another, just like cellphone companies do. They will already probably have the designated arbiter and investigators for the case. This even allows you to have a specific code of law apply to you, if you both of you have contracted DROs following a Sharia law or whatever. The DROs have great incentives not to go to war with one another since it skyrockets their prices but they also can't just dismiss their client's contract since it will lose them business.
However, if you are somebody that gets into trouble all the time without actually doing technical violations, your contract insurance fee will rise, just like it will if you can't pay debts. There will probably also be CRAs for these purposes which will increase the fees with your shady dealings. If you are truly vile in your contracts, no DRO will want to insure the contracts with you and then nobody will want to do business with you. You will be ostracized until you make amends.
Basically the same will also happen to those who violate the body of another, of course.
These sort of arrangements are better because they:
-will give incetives to be clear about your dealings (this also will include informing customers about what's in their food)
-can be also used for insuring against pollution in your property. (the cellphone-company-like connectedness of DROs required so that the neighbourhood can unite) In this case the DROs will want to help the potential local polluters to pollute less so that they don't have to pay that insurance.
-will incetivize your DRO to prevent crime against you and thus help you secure your person and property (less fees for you if you have voice-activated TVs, only deal in fingerprint-controlled currency, give you discounts on martial arts courses nearby and whatnot)
-won't make you pay for expensive prisons nor expensive and exhausing trials
I'm pretty tired and I might have missed something, but I would appreciate more questions about how might an anarchist society function in practice.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
have you thought about what would happen if you spent the time studying social theories developing productive and marketable skills instead
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Ebay is, in fact, a private dispute resolution organization. No trials needed, it uses only non-violent solutions (DROs can also use forceful methods but will avoid it), it uses a reputation system to give incentives to honest deals and it will refund the insured customer.
I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden