Ask an Anarchist

Considering there is an ask a left-socialist thread I thought I would try my own ideology in this.



Ask away!

Second post for any good questions that people may reask. I don't want to hae to repeat myself to often.

Before I ask more specific questions, I just thought I'd ask for some clarification. Are you a 100% anarchist that endorses no government whatsoever? Define your personal views and why/how you consider yourself an anarchist.

There are a few different schools of thought concerning anarchy so I thought it would be best for you to explain a bit more before I assume anything about your views.

Exactly how far do your views go?

How anarchy will not go down familiar "create gangs and become eventually modern feudals" rout?
What will protect individual against armed bunch of other individuals with a leader?
How complex projects (like colonization of Mars or similar magnitude) could be accomplished in anarchy?
Those are things i do not get about Anarchy and people who support it.

who do I call if somone is breaking into my house, who do I call when I fall and break my leg, who will treat me?

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
who do I call if somone is breaking into my house, who do I call when I fall and break my leg, who will treat me?

In an Anarchy you will probably need family, friends, and neighbors.

This is where they come in.

For treatment, any viable anarchy would have to be a highly educated population.

That way everyone is a Doc. So anyone could treat anyone.

Just throwing that out there because my view of a successful Anarchy is somewhat like this.

Question 1....how is a anarchy government style not the most easily conquerable type of system?

Question 2...I got some great guns...I will be sniping my neighbors, conquering their land, taking their stuff, and enslaving their women...who is going to stop me? :-) (will let those whom join me use the women and have a cut of the stuff of course)

really thats it...the human species with our genetic predisposition to conquer and amass will make this fail as anything more than a philosophy and some cool song themes.

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge

How complex projects (like colonization of Mars or similar magnitude) could be accomplished in anarchy?

Another question for you to ponder.

How could anyone "Govern" people who can hop in a spaceship and just leave our solar system? Consider aliens for a minute.

They would have to have free will, and cooperate with their species by choice.

Otherwise they could simply just leave the solar system and never come back, thus making it 100% impossible to have any governance or control over them.

So IMO, a inter-galactic civilization would HAVE to have many elements of anarchy. There is simply no way to control a person who has an advanced spaceship. They are free to go wherever they want and ignore any commands sent from light years away.

Granted we are talking in the very distant future here for humans.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Question 1....how is a anarchy government style not the most easily conquerable type of system?

Question 2...I got some great guns...I will be sniping my neighbors, conquering their land, taking their stuff, and enslaving their women...who is going to stop me? :-) (will let those whom join me use the women and have a cut of the stuff of course)

1) How can you conquer those who adhere to no leader?

2) Wouldn't those neighbors have guns too? Seems like a "stand off" would arise quickly and it would turn into a stalemate.

You ask good questions though, and it would imply that for Anarchism to work it would have to be a Planet wide development.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by muzzleflash]

Considering there is an ask a left-socialist thread I thought I would try my own ideology in this.



Ask away!

and

Second post for any good questions that people may reask. I don't want to hae to repeat myself to often.

That you have indicated you are an anarchist and have defined proceedural rules for this forum confuses me. Why is that? Have you declared yourself dictator all of a sudden?

Originally posted by AshleyD
Before I ask more specific questions, I just thought I'd ask for some clarification. Are you a 100% anarchist that endorses no government whatsoever?

Exactly how far do your views go?

I am not an Anarchist who dislikes all authority. The only authority I agree is the authority who has equal power and rights of the people. Someone like a blacksmith, or a parent. A lead engineer. They gain there authority they aren't given more rights than anyone else.

Small, localized government is what I agree with, almost like city-states. The "city-states" decide the form of economy, it can be socialist, communist, capitalist, what ever floats there boat, but it should be decided by the people.


Sorry it took a while to reply.

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
How anarchy will not go down familiar "create gangs and become eventually modern feudals" rout?
What will protect individual against armed bunch of other individuals with a leader?
How complex projects (like colonization of Mars or similar magnitude) could be accomplished in anarchy?
Those are things i do not get about Anarchy and people who support it.

1) People will have to realize they need to help each other. I have trust in humanity enough that they will realize fighting doesn't help.
2) My believe in Anarchism is different, some leaders are alright, as long as they aren't as powerful as a king. Therefor each one can have a leader.
3) It depends on the city-states want for space colonization, if it isn't needed, it isn't going to happen. If people want taxes to put these things in place, so be it.
Each city-state will have what they want depending on what works for them. I want a very decentralized government.

Originally posted by muzzleflash


1) How can you conquer those who adhere to no leader?

2) Wouldn't those neighbors have guns too? Seems like a "stand off" would arise quickly and it would turn into a stalemate.

1) iron fisted slavery or death.

2) he who shoots quickest. that thought means since the enemy has guns, and we have guns, there will never be war..and we know thats not true.


Anarchy is the form of government left for people left completely alone in primitive lands, or people so advanced they no longer have need for any materialistic objects...

This *could* be not that far off if we spent billions upon billions in the development of a drexler style Nano-Assembler however, until there is not even one person whom wants for something, then there needs to be governments and laws.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by SaturnFX]

Originally posted by Phlynx

Originally posted by AshleyD
Before I ask more specific questions, I just thought I'd ask for some clarification. Are you a 100% anarchist that endorses no government whatsoever?

Exactly how far do your views go?

I am not an Anarchist who dislikes all authority. The only authority I agree is the authority who has equal power and rights of the people. Someone like a blacksmith, or a parent. A lead engineer. They gain there authority they aren't given more rights than anyone else.

Small, localized government is what I agree with, almost like city-states. The "city-states" decide the form of economy, it can be socialist, communist, capitalist, what ever floats there boat, but it should be decided by the people.


Sorry it took a while to reply.

Interesting concept Phlynx. I think however your idea of Anarchy perhaps subscribes better to Libertarianism.

In political philosophy, Libertarianism is a position that advocates the maximization of individual liberty[1] and the minimization or even abolition of the state.[2][3] Libertarians embrace viewpoints across a political spectrum, ranging from pro-property to anti-property (sometimes phrased as "right" versus "left"), from minarchist to openly anarchist.[4][5][6][7]

All schools of libertarianism support strong personal rights to life and liberty, though there is disagreement on the subject of private property. The most commonly known formulation of libertarianism supports free market capitalism[8][9][10] by advocating a right to private property, including property in the means of production,[11] minimal government regulation of that property, minimal taxation, and rejection of the welfare state, all within the context of the rule of law.[12][13][14] Some pro-property libertarians are anarchists who call for the elimination of the state.[15] Some call the pro-property view propertarian, and some pro-property libertarians believe a "propertarian philosophy" is a weak basis for libertarian morality.[16] A number of countries have libertarian parties which run candidates for political office.

Libertarian socialists, unlike right-wing libertarians, are opposed to structures of authority and hierarchy in personal relations and the larger social order.[17] Most notably they are opposed to state power and forms of private property such as capital.[18][19][20] These libertarians often believe in the abolition of private property and may be called non-propertarian or anti-propertarian.[21][22] They do not seek state solutions, instead looking to voluntary and popularly controlled associations.[23][24][25]

From Wiki

Now mind you this would be an off shoot of what is considered original libertarianism, but it fits quite well with my idea of how things should work.

Small localized government and extremely small if even non-existant federal government.

~Keeper

reply to post by Phlynx

The only authority I agree is the authority who has equal power and rights of the people. Someone like a blacksmith, or a parent. A lead engineer. They gain there authority they aren't given more rights than anyone else.

So then actually you are more of a meritocrat where authority is granted by demonstrated competence.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
who do I call if somone is breaking into my house, who do I call when I fall and break my leg, who will treat me?

Depends on where you live, if the city-state has an organized a police , and has made laws that are agreed with by the people, there could be trials accordingly. It would almost be like the democracy of Athens, accept women would have a say too.

reply to post by Phlynx


What you describe here is not an anarchist form of governance. It is actually more a non centralized republic with smaller forms of local governance.

Something like what the US is supposed to have.

A true anarchist state of governance would have absolutely no centralized governance with only small feudal or community organization. Even just a family or individual being the largest form of governance.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Question 1....how is a anarchy government style not the most easily conquerable type of system?

Question 2...I got some great guns...I will be sniping my neighbors, conquering their land, taking their stuff, and enslaving their women...who is going to stop me? :-) (will let those whom join me use the women and have a cut of the stuff of course)

1) People organize

2) You're not the only one with guns.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp


That you have indicated you are an anarchist and have defined proceedural rules for this forum confuses me. Why is that? Have you declared yourself dictator all of a sudden?

Anarchists aren't all against laws and rules. Society needs certain guidelines to get along.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Small localized government and extremely small if even non-existant federal government.

All well and good until you want someone to fix the highway....

aint my responsibility...