What we have today borderlines on totalitiarian government. The situation has arisen where every aspect of our lives government seeks to direct. By “government” I mean the three branches of government, not THE Government, which is Law, our Law being the Constitution.

What we need is Constitutional government, not what we have. This Genie can only be returned to the bottle when those who object to the unauthorized taking of power begin to bring those criminals to justice.

It is time we quit thinking of people as government. When IN one of the three branches, in that position they act as servants for the rest of us–not as rulers. Too many Americans want rulers, and we should send them to Iran where they can get their fill of it.

We are supposed to be sovereigns on our own land. That means that over the line you are subject to my law, and over your line, I am subject to your law. Were that so, we’d have a much more civil society because those who are intent on creating chaos through their actions would end up dead on somebody’s doorstep.

The solution is not NO government. The solution is not MO government. The solution is subject government, where servants act according to our will, instead of seeking to line their own pockets, feather their own nests, seek their own will. Those who do so should be punished as the criminals they are.

Royce

I am game for this…

two islands, one with anarcho-libertarians and the other with minarchists

Nah, more fun would be one bunch of anarchists and one of communists. Then we could see who could generate the most electricity by strapping magnets to their temples and wrapping their revolving eyes in copper wire.

I think the anarchists would win at 3p/kW-hr simply by having higher speed eyeballs. On the other hand, the communists would likely develop a state first, and would then invade the loonies ^W anarchists and get free electricity to power their Leninist Utopia.

You know it makes sense.

EG

Sit back and see who gets rich first!

The question is how far removed is the real world from the ideal

Very far indeed in this case, I think.

It asks that people justify the level of Statism that exists

People want welfare. In a democracy, they can vote for welfare. People will therefore vote for welfare. Welfare requires a very large state infrastructure to ration provision through regulation and control, since there is no pricing mechanism to ration it. Having said that, democracy isn’t the only way this can happen. Rome (not particularly democratic after about 50BC) used a corn dole and free entertainment to pacify the plebs, hence the phrase ‘bread and circuses.’

But the con is the State

No, it’s not really. The con is public welfare, and the bloated state is what follows.

EG

Although, if we’re on that spaceflight of fantasy, would not communism be more workable on the moon than here on Earth? Fewer vested interests, hostile environment to make people pull together for the common good, and so forth.

And looking further ahead (not entirely seriously, of course), how useful is anarcho-capitalism if there is no capital? It’s possible that the ultimate result of machines doing work is that machines do ALL the work, which means money ceases to be relevant since everything you could want can be provided by unpaid mechanical labour. Perhaps Marx will have the last laugh after all…

EG

A city or a canton could be anarcho-capitalist I’m sure.

Perhaps the scale is the issue in general. Federalism and nationalism is con at this point. The last 100 years has seen the rise of broad Statism. The US Federal government is the largest (or least the most well funded) entity in the history of the world. We have more laws and regulations, especially those enacted from dizzying heights, than we have ever had. And yet life is lived, as it has always been, by discrete individuals. What has changed? Runaway Statism. So anarcho-capitalists throw out an ideal. It is a frame of reference. Just as pure communism is. The question is how far removed is the real world from the ideal and pursuading people to reexamine their views. It asks that people justify the level of Statism that exists.

Of course when the majority gleefully turn out to pull a lever to unleash a small handful of people who can’t possibly know them from Adam, and unleash a torrent of laws and money and force from on high, there is a long way to go.

Personally the problem has its roots in technology and communication. People have been prone to superstition throughout our history. It has caused all sorts of destructive behaviors. But there was at least a natural boundary to its effects as memes and concepts could only travel so far, and slowly. Now people, with a few scraps of information via sound bites, can convince themselves that pulling a lever will right all the ills in the world, or enough anyway. Ease of communication is great on the one hand, but I cannot disconnect the rise of Statism and the rise in communication technology.

Most people want to be conned I guess, and when the con is small, it affects few, especially those who are smart enough to avoid getting involved. But the con is the State, and the State is near all, the individual in such a reality is shit out of luck.

A city or a canton could be anarcho-capitalist I’m sure.

I think that anarcho-capitalism could work in a new entity such as in a space colony. The reason I believe this is that these people will have less baggage, than if one tried to do it in an existing nation. There would be less vested interests. As the colony would be in a necessarily hostile enviroment they would be encouraged to get along as well.

The main trouble with the “less government is good” line is that it scares alot of people. It shouldn’t but it does, mainly because the statists have tried to paint the limited government meme as a polite way of calling for anarchy.

I’d sure like to try to do without government. Anyone want to join me?

I strongly suspect that anarcho-capitalism is as workable in practice (whatever the merits of the theory) as communism – i.e. you can do it on a small scale with a group of like-minded people, but anything else is simply not going to work.

I sometimes wish it was within my power to grant an island or some such to the a-c people and watch what happens to them. I suspect it would be an interesting experience (at least for those on the outside looking in…)

However, there is nothing to stop the nascent anarcho-capitalists putting up the money and buying some land or perhaps even an island & putting their theories into practice. In fact, you’d have to do it that way, wouldn’t you – can’t have the state helping you.

EG

“Notwithstanding the theological arguments for anarcho-capitalism with their attendant assumption that people are markedly more rational and reasonable than 6,000 years of recorded history suggests, it is not really possible, in practice, to do without some form of government.”

Umm….just a thought but I’d sure like to try to do without government. Anyone want to join me?