I don’t consider myself an anarchist, at least not yet. One huge intellectual roadblock I am having preventing me from accepting anarchy is how it can be sustained. Who is to prevent a government from forming, or a powerful elite from taking over and acting as a de facto government? What if somebody hired a private army to take over and reinstate government? If there are books to read on the topic, I would appreciate it.
One word… BELIEF!
Anything social, political, or religious is possible if people believe in it.
The entire world would be saved if everyone believed in Jesus.
Socialism would work just fine if people believe in it.
Limited Constitutional Socialism would work just fine if people believe in it.
Belief is the glue of eternal vigilance that binds all social systems or orders.
You can’t force anyone to believe anything. The options are 1) appeal to emotion or 2) appeal to reason.
People believe things for the same reason people act. If something is perceived to be in their best interest they will believe it. Human beings are robots that are pre-programmed to pursue satisfaction as it is perceived by each individual.
The Non-Aggression Principle, Austrian economics, and voluntaryist society is an appeal to reason why freedom is in everyones best economic interests.
The order of universal law is as follows:
-
Natural Law (ie. gravity)
-
Economic Law
-
Man’s Law.
Government is in the realm of #3. Voluntary society is in the realm of #2.
I like looking to real examples when I have questions. Research Barcelona 1936. Sure, they didn’t sustain themselves, but they were fighting a two front war. The EZLN, while more accurately autonomists than anarchists per se, have maintained their autonomy pretty well.
The plain and simple answer is nothing stops that besides you and those who agree with you.
I do consider myself an anarchist already, but I believe, honestly, that anarchy will truly be sustainable around 50-100 years before children learn in school about the “age of the state”. I will say though, that if society embraces it in this age that there is no way that one individual could accumulate enough other individuals and arms and media outlets to overtake an anarchist society. The problem is that all “civil” societies up until now have been started with the institution of the state. If you believe that states can only grow by their nature then you can see the problem. We have to begin a society without a state institution in order to maintain it.
BUT what do I know.. No one can know for sure how to sustain a truly free society because there haven’t been many in history.. I would suggest reading the FREE books on the mises site. I can’t point to one specifically about sustaining the system, but you’ll find elements of that argument in a majority of the mises.org publications I am sure.
And BTW.. If you haven’t already ready “The Anatomy of the State” then it is a must. Even if you are absolutely convinced that anarchy cannot be sustained then I think you’ll lean toward a belief that it is worth a shot.. Even a state lottery scam shot.
Anarchism is unsustainable in our world, not because of internal factors, but because of external ones. Internal factors coould not destroy an anarchist society with something approaching a strong belief in anti-statism, no individual or group of individuals could gather the support or money needed from within the society.
Anarchism is unsustainable today because of external factors. The existence of large aggressive governments mean that an anarchist society would be doomed because there’s no good way that it could organize defense. Rothbard argued that gurrila warfare would be the solution to this, and this would work in certain cases. if the United States went anarchist then no western European country would dare attack it because of this fact if not he implicit idea. China however, maybe Russia, could prove to be so brutal that they would force the U.S into submission through shere brutality.
If you keep thinking that long enough, you may agree that there is no answer. Social systems are far too complex for us to predict. Anarchy will have to be tried.
“Anything social, political, or religious is possible if people believe in it.”
Religious belief is metaphysical and not dependent on number of people that recognize it.
How Could A Voluntary Society Function?
Well, free marketeers argue that free enterprise is always favorable when in the shoe market, shirt market, meat market, etc. Why can’t the same be applied to law or societies in general? I do not really get into the theory of how anarchism would work anymore because all we do is speculate when we say how anarchism may work, which is pointless, and especially since we are probably not going to see an anarchist society (the way we vision it) any time soon.
But how will that belief be nurtured over time? What will prevent collectivists etc from gaining influence?
If Webster’s Dictionary definition of religious is correct:
**
Then any reality is possible if people believe in it…
If the majority of people are against a state, then this majority will probably have more money and firepower, so how can statists beat them? The same is true with democracy. As long as most people think democracy is legitimate, no dictator will be able to rise, at least not for a significant period of time.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
Well, free marketeers argue that free enterprise is always favorable when in the shoe market, shirt market, meat market, etc. Why can’t the same be applied to law or societies in general? I do not really get into the theory of how anarchism would work anymore because all we do is speculate when we say how anarchism may work, which is pointless, and especially since we are probably not going to see an anarchist society (the way we vision it) any time soon.
[/quote]
The one thing that a free market really has problem with are collective, non-excludable goods. One of those is defense and it is indispensable. It is especially bad because it’s a service that can be literally a spending game (e.g. states V. anarchist areas)
“Then any reality is possible if people believe in it…”
Ugh.
1 + 1 != 2
The one thing that a free market really has problem with are collective, non-excludable goods. One of those is defense and it is indispensable. It is especially bad because it’s a service that can be literally a spending game (e.g. states V. anarchist areas)
[/quote]
Are you saying that the market has problems with non-excludable goods in general?
Trust your intuition, buddy. Nothing is preventing a government from forming. Many “anarchists” on here are really idealistic when it comes to humanity. Not in the sense that violence would cease or anything that drastic, but they believe that people’s natural will to be free will override the majority’s will to be lazy and have things done for them.
Make no mistake, government is nothing that hit us out of nowhere in the middle of the night. It formed for a reason, and it is corrupt for a reason. Mankind has an innate urge to have more power, and some take this to a public size and seek to control others. We are naturally competitive, just like all other life on earth, and due to this competition, there is always a loser and groups of people will always pull a Robinhood and steal from the people who have while giving to the people who have not.
Government is a natural response for humanity, which basically comes from established law and order, territory, et cetera. Unfortunately, it is inevitable, even if there is a constant struggle between the anarchists and their enemy the state, it means the state still exists. I’ll prepare myself for a ton of flack, but I wanted to give my honest perspective.