I’m always thought that with enough education, anarchism (and for that matter, minarchism, libertarianism, etc.) would be sustainable, but that the concept of such a system is hard for the vast majority of people to accept / understand; remember, many people still haven’t caught up to the fact that in the 21st century (more so now than ever, but this applied in the past before), left vs. right does not matter nearly as much as liberty vs. authority. There is also the issue of mis-information, another annoying side-effect of public education.
I believe that sometime in the future, assuming that we live long enough into this century (there are various predictions, both scientific and non-scientific of civilization ending), people will become educated enough to embrace anarchism. This is assuming, additionally, that the Internet continues to thrive in some form or another (a separate one made by users, or a darknet, for instance), which I’d imagine it would if this current one wound up too regulated and censored. When this time would come, is up in the air, but it would also have to require a more independent, self-responsible & self-reliant population, which I’d imagine isn’t the majority for now.
Back on topic, however, I’ll stop beating around the bush & choose “Minarchist”, but I’m still new to the Austrian school & other economic concepts of Libertarianism.
I went from being bleeding heart liberal/borderline pinko to a minarchist/capitalist. All it took was a little (real) education on economics. And reading Nock, of course.
Localist. I have been studying early Cherokee social structure for a couple of years and believe there is some insight there for local rule. It also appears to correspond to Hoppe’s ideas on natural orders.
As for economics, definitely anarcho-capitalist. The only think I hate worse than the devil is crony capitalism.
Despite having tried to make sense of many anarchist arguments and idolizing Murray Rothbard to a ridiculous degree, I’m still firmly a minarchist.
But I’m willing to keep on learning.[:D] I just can’t see how anarchism becomes established efficiently, nor that what some refer to as market anarchism isn’t really just a form of minarchism. i.e. Someone provides the service of force and law in some region, hence they are a type of government. Anyway, save the debates for future threads.
btw: This is my first post here. Despite having been a regular visitor to mises.org for about 10 years, I just found this forum.
I hope I can learn the best methods of being a… Successionist, Abolishionist, Anti-Imperialist, Rationalist, Constructionist, Negative law Theorist, etc, Freedom Lover… I can utilize.
The wheel must turn. It’s time. Our revolution, the american one, should ever be in perpituity .
When we fail to impose natural rights, as supposed citizens, we not only violate our good will, we violate each other with a lack of commen sense, and an apeal to force. Be ashamed cowards. Defend your property rights.
O.K. you got me minarchist~for the sake of property rights only. I want a government who can only justify actions with the defense of individualism, and property rights. A state that protects the people from the state.
Does that make me an institutionalist, or a follower of method? Or, is a methodology of any kind an institution of reason?
You can call me what you want, and I hope it’s something nasty. I want to learn from my ineptitudes.
Economist… (economism = what Jay Nock decried as the idea according to which the whole of life consists in the individual production (including exchange) and consumption of goods).
As for minarchism vs anarchism, i consider it a false question. Both interpret every new step from the actual world toward the less possible governmental interventionism in society as being a step in the good direction. Only when we (ever) come as close to this ideal as to wonder if a new step would still be profitable will the minarchism vs anarchism debate be meaningful.
(If the question is raised during my own lifetime, I will become, at that point, anarchist and not minarchist. But as long as such is not the case, the two are just the same).
I used to be a Liberal, then Communist for a few months, then a conservative for a few years (I discovered that a market economy is the best), then Libertarian for a few months (I hate religion so I discovered this party), then again conservative for one year (when I became addicted to racism, and when I believed that government such as education, anti-drug and censorship laws are useful), then anarcho-capitalist for a month (when I became skeptical of censorship), then Cato Libertarian for two months (when I became skeptical of private defence agencies), then Ron Paul paleoconservative for three months (when I discovered Ron Paul), then minarchist for three months (when I discovered Austrian School), then ultra-minarchist for one week (when I denounced intellectual property and I became non-racist), then anarcho-capitalist (in theory, NO SIMULATION). I am always anti-abortion and individualist. I was not an anarchist just because I am racist. I am not racist now.
I suppose I started as a minarchist. I always beleived in the Constitiution and small governments who govern best. Mises.org challenged me to question some of the preconceptions I had about government and freedom. I’ve always been a history buff, so I understand how history is written by the victors. What I knew but didn’t understand was that the victors write the history. The problem is that people rarely are able to be impartial obersrvers of the facts. Education, culture and society all mesh to create the filters with which you parse reality. Since encontering mises.org, I’d say that I’ve inexorably slid into the anarchist camp. The tipping point for me had to be learning of the Supreme Court decision which effectively took the power to decide cases away from juries and enshrined it in the judicicary. That’s when we truly lost control of our mincarchist government.
Government grows, especially over time. It’s kind of like kudzu, you constantly need to keep it trimmed back.
I flirt between both minarchism and anarchism, to be quite honest. Generally though, I find that as I read more anarcho-capitalist literature I tend that way. However, I do consider the debate irrelevant right now as I view any reduction in state power a success, and so minarchists are my friends until the day comes when we have to go further than them.
Ultimately I’d like to see a market anarchist system, but am willing to work within the system in order to attempt to achieve those aims. I don’t buy into the camp that says it’s necessary for market anarchists to eschew political participation because that means participating in an evil system. Yes the system is evil but the majority of folks don’t think that way and the idealized cold turkey approach for the purposes of maintaining ones own idealistic purity is not pragmatic. The way forward is to argue for a) more devolvement of power to local communities b) argue for market based solutions for government issues; i.e. infrastructure etc c) focus on those issues that a market based solution is least ‘radical’ for the average individual d) expand from there. Sometimes I think that market anarchists fall into the perfect is the enemy of the good trap.
To be more specific, I would call myself a left-Rothbardian to distinguish myself from the paleolibertarians (Rockwell, et al). I think that electoral politics are by no means a sufficient way to bring about liberty (although I do practice defensive voting), and that the counter-economy, education, and peaceful civil disobedience are the means to the free society.
Years ago, I asked myself the following question: is there any good or service that society needs that government can provide more efficiently or justly than the market can provide it? Another way: is there any good thing that the government can do that the market can’t? I answered no, and thus did my intellectual loyalties become clear.
Anybody have an opinion on Stefan Molyneux’s DRO (dispute resolution organisation) model? I’m still trying to figure all this stuff out but I’m fairly sure that professional arbitrators such as DROs would spontaneously appear in an anarchist system. There would certainly be a demand for them.