On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 00:41:07 +0000 Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
Anyway, anarchists handle the problem of criminal cooperation inside a government by getting rid of the government.
I think you'd only see temporary 'improvement' and for a shorter time than with constitutional statism.
Well, that's just guessing.
Barring a general population wide increase in awareness/consciousness of course - but the same can be said for any system.
Exactly. Anarchism is to be compared with other systems while holding the rest of variables constant. Otherwise the comparison is meaningless. And 'ceteribus paribus' anarchism wins.
I can keep my mental door open to the possibility that political anarchism might provide a longer duration of stability, or a greater likelihood for "population awareness increase" but frankly I doubt that.
Of course we can argue that replacing one undemocratic mafia, e.g. the British overlords that you guys kicked out, with another is essentially "handling the problem of criminal cooperation inside a government by getting rid of that government" as you say.
I'm not sure I'm following. The american coup d'etat didn't get rid of government. Actually it created a government that was and is worse than the british empire.
What are the metrics of national sanity? - wealth levels? - human intention towards family self sufficiency? - stable military? - deaths due to mafia faction fighting? - actual freedoms which can be readily lived by individuals v.s. proclaimed freedoms which have impenetrable and unspoken boundaries? (speech, movement, association, growing food/plants, breeding, making and doing anything which harms no one, choice v.s. imposition of any medical procedure or substance, ...)
Why would political anarchy not descend into mafia coalitions, control and actual anarchy, more quickly than constitutional statism?
Why would it? And if it does, so what? That was the starting point, so nothing is lost.
Over here in Australia we have had pretty good run re 'political stability', despite more and more total ratbags who now dominate - yes, in military we've been lapdogs to USAgov in Vietnam, Iraq etc, but internally we had say 80 years of prosperity and 'stability' - I can imagine it having degraded more quickly if we had political anarchism
Well, but that's speculation, not argument =P
as our "foundation" rather than a "binding" constitution for the mafia to target and having to spend effort to undermine.
Just like HTTPS - not actually providing its claims, just raising the bar - does constitutional democracy also raise the bar?
It misdirects resources. If democracy was actually a threat to the powers that be, it would be ilegal.
Here we go - with constitutional statism, we need more truth in its opening pages. How's this:
- we the people are, on the whole, sheep, willingly shorn for any 2 bit lie promise - we are often greedy, self centered and small minded to an extreme - we are by nature tribal, we live in fear, and we will sell our mates for a dozen silver coins and our souls for a bowl of rice and the promise of 'protection' from 'bad things' - we are so pathetic, we will even continue to alternately vote in two known political mafia gangs who persist in promising us everything (housing, food, clothing, medical and 'protection') for nothing (just a vote for them) whilst they continue to financially rape the country through illegal and debt 'instruments'
- and so because we are so pathetic, we acknowledge that if we even pretended to be able to live our own lives free of representatives and a protectorate, we would very soon run screaming in fear to the nearest gun-totin militaristic saviour
- in our well trodden and known to be doomed to total corruption within at most a few decades, but ultimately placebo, if self-deluding, concept of democracy, we seek to placate our own madness and desire for an unachievable order in the world by declaring another democratic religion for we, the sheeple, very soon to be shorn of any and all of our achievements in this world by our new democratic mafia overloards
How's that for an opener?
Well, I would say "not bad" =) though I think the generalization is too broad. A poetic license?
Certainly, we live in interesting times.
although I do think some systems may have better prospects for social stability over some period of time - although more fundamentally is the state of consciousness of "we humans" - and educating the next generation to strive for something higher than the pursuit of greed.
Re education, I do recommend John Taylor Gatto
I've read stuff from Gatto. He's pretty good. What's really amazing about him is that he worked for tens of years for the US public indoctrin I mean US public education system to finally realize how fucked up the system is.
And then wrote so in clear and enjoyable to read true stories. Good stuff.
Regards Zenaan