Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I Am An Anarchist

catb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 31 posts

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#21

Post by knowtheory »

maratd wrote: post #19
onan_barbarian wrote: post #4

ESRs historical analysis is possibly one of the few things less compelling that the rest of achievements whether coding or writing. I couldn't bring myself to read his Oral Sex Guide, so perhaps I'm being unfair. The year before, the Nazi Party couldn't round up more than about 45% of the vote; it's worth noting that these 90% numbers (both the later 1933 election after all the other parties were banned, and the refe…

> childish libertarian lunacy The second amendment is childish lunacy?

If you've read his other writing, yeah, the way he defends it, it is.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#22

Post by Jach »

ericd wrote: post #14
smallblacksun wrote: post #9

His argument is basically that all governments can become corrupted, so we should have no government. The first part of his argument is obviously true, but is far from sufficient justification for his conclusion. It completely ignores all the good things that come from government (social services, police, military defense). It also ignores that the lack of government can also become corrupted. In places like Somalis,…

Also, a completely decentralized country is helpless in the face of an unfriendly organized one. Not sure how he missed that in his years of pondering.

Helpless in which ways? It depends what the unfriendly one's goal is and how strong-willed the decentralized people are. Anyway, it's fairly easy to organize (in time though?), the hard part is disorganizing again once the threat is taken care of. Undoing seems to usually be hard in most cases, especially when a transfer of power is involved.

I don't think many anarchists are against hierarchies at all, just in the cases of huge groups and where membership is required. If I don't want to have the US gov. rule over me, it's kind of hard for me to emigrate etc. and it's doubtful that somewhere else is all that better. If I don't like my job because of the manager or CEO, I can quit and get another job or start my own company.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#23

Post by true_religion »

b0sk wrote: post #16
olalonde wrote: post #10

I'm personally a minarchist. From Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchism ): > Minarchism (sometimes called minimal statism, small government, or limited-government libertarianism) is a libertarian political ideology which maintains that the state's only legitimate function is the protection of individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud.

I doubt it's going to work. What is going to prevent state from becoming a totalitarian authority? The state is going to attract sociopaths and power crazy individuals. Democracy is probably the system which can do the least damage.

A minarchist government would likely be a democracy.

It's merely that its functions would be constrained by its constitution---i.e. no socialized benefits apart from security from external threats, and internal violence.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#24

Post by Nicknameless »

olalonde wrote: post #10

I'm personally a minarchist. From Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchism ): > Minarchism (sometimes called minimal statism, small government, or limited-government libertarianism) is a libertarian political ideology which maintains that the state's only legitimate function is the protection of individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud.

As an Australian living in one of the most heavily taxed countries in the world with socialised health care, education etc, all I can say is that I love my very high standard of living and freedom from any real financial concerns related to health, education, housing etc. You can keep your minarchism.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#25

Post by ericd »

Jach wrote: post #22
ericd wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, a completely decentralized country is helpless in the face of an unfriendly organized one. Not sure how he missed that in his years of pondering.

Helpless in which ways? It depends what the unfriendly one's goal is and how strong-willed the decentralized people are. Anyway, it's fairly easy to organize (in time though?), the hard part is disorganizing again once the threat is taken care of. Undoing seems to usually be hard in most cases, especially when a transfer of power is involved. I don't think many anarchists are against hierarchies at all, just in the c…

I was thinking mostly militarily - complete decentralization makes it much easier for a coordinated enemy to pick your organization apart. There are a bunch of other disadvantages too.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#26

Post by olalonde »

Nicknameless wrote: post #24
olalonde wrote: post #10

I'm personally a minarchist. From Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchism ): > Minarchism (sometimes called minimal statism, small government, or limited-government libertarianism) is a libertarian political ideology which maintains that the state's only legitimate function is the protection of individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud.

As an Australian living in one of the most heavily taxed countries in the world with socialised health care, education etc, all I can say is that I love my very high standard of living and freedom from any real financial concerns related to health, education, housing etc. You can keep your minarchism.

I probably live in a more socialist state than you (Quebec, Canada) and I respectfully disagree.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#27

Post by theblueadept111 »

knieveltech wrote: post #5
theblueadept111 wrote: post #2

This article explain why the author calls himself an anarchist, but not what he defines "anarchist" to mean. It is simply someone who opposes any form of state government? Even if the majority of the people want state government? If so, by what means would the author seek to impose anarchy against the will of people, and how would that be better than the problems of democracy that he rails against?

Nobody said anything about imposing anarchy on anyone. The author is postulating that government in all common forms has consistently failed in it's (implied) responsibility to function without inflicting undue hardship on the governed and in lieu of acceptably functional structured alternatives, a switch to pure anarchism may be the only way for the people to avoid said hardships at the hands of government. Personal…

To my mind, there is nothing such as "anarchism" except what you see when you look around you, wherever you are. The strong dominate the weak, and when sufficiently organized, they are called "the government". You can't "switch" to anarchy because you can't escape it in the first place. Government is an emergent property of a self-organizing society.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#28

Post by turbojerry »

ericd wrote: post #25
Jach wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helpless in which ways? It depends what the unfriendly one's goal is and how strong-willed the decentralized people are. Anyway, it's fairly easy to organize (in time though?), the hard part is disorganizing again once the threat is taken care of. Undoing seems to usually be hard in most cases, especially when a transfer of power is involved. I don't think many anarchists are against hierarchies at all, just in the c…

I was thinking mostly militarily - complete decentralization makes it much easier for a coordinated enemy to pick your organization apart. There are a bunch of other disadvantages too.

If that were true then the US military should have easily destroyed Al Qaeda and the Taliban. There is plenty of information on 4th generation and asymmetric warfare on the net which will help you understand why.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#29

Post by ericd »

turbojerry wrote: post #28
ericd wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking mostly militarily - complete decentralization makes it much easier for a coordinated enemy to pick your organization apart. There are a bunch of other disadvantages too.

If that were true then the US military should have easily destroyed Al Qaeda and the Taliban. There is plenty of information on 4th generation and asymmetric warfare on the net which will help you understand why.

Right, I was thinking about conventional wars and prevention of occupation/subjugation. They haven't been rooted out and killed, but they weren't able to stop the US from occupying their country. There are many things the US is not willing to do which less moral armies have done somewhat successfully in the past to root out guerillas, but that's all a different topic.

Re: Why I Am An Anarchist

#30

Post by knieveltech »

theblueadept111 wrote: post #27
knieveltech wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody said anything about imposing anarchy on anyone. The author is postulating that government in all common forms has consistently failed in it's (implied) responsibility to function without inflicting undue hardship on the governed and in lieu of acceptably functional structured alternatives, a switch to pure anarchism may be the only way for the people to avoid said hardships at the hands of government. Personal…

To my mind, there is nothing such as "anarchism" except what you see when you look around you, wherever you are. The strong dominate the weak, and when sufficiently organized, they are called "the government". You can't "switch" to anarchy because you can't escape it in the first place. Government is an emergent property of a self-organizing society.

Certainly you aren't the first person to postulate that and it's a very valid point, but what if you could get people to organize without coercion? Doesn't that at least sound appealing? Like something worth striving for?
Post reply on HN