Statism and the Dissemination of Information

[Amanojack]

I was browsing Ron Paul stories when I came upon an interesting proposal.

@"[http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011123115274/us/politics-and-economics/ron-paul-has-already-won.html

(http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011123115274/us/politics-and-economics/ron-paul-has-already-won.html)"]

There is apparently only one struggle in the world – and in the US. That is the seeming struggle between a handful of ancient, elite families who control hundreds of trillions via central banks around the world and want to move to world government (dominated by them) and the rest of us.

This Anglosphere power elite has used its unimaginable money base to seemingly pervert the workings of the entire world. It apparently uses dominant social themes – fear-based promotions disseminated by its bought-and-paid-for media, think tanks, universities and governments – to frighten middle classes into giving up wealth and power to cleverly crafted globalist institutions. This is the internationalist government-in-waiting.

But a funny thing happened on the way to world government. The Internet. About a decade ago, we began to focus on the idea that the Internet was a modern-day Gutenberg Press and would have a similar impact.

The Gutenberg Press basically spawned the Renaissance, Reformation and contributed to counter-Reformation trends such as the Age of Enlightenment that was spawned by the elites themselves in an effort to counteract the power of the Gutenberg Press. The Age of Enlightenment postulated that man was perfectible and the agency of perfection was government.

Government is an absolute necessity for power elites. With the advent of the Gutenberg Press, however, something changed. The great families of Europe found it advisable to promote the fallacious idea of “democracy.” This idea, that people would “have a say” in their governments, allowed the power elite then and now to withdraw from the public scene and dominate from behind the scenes.

Putting aside the bankster talk, what stuck me was the idea that the invention of the printing press (in the year 1440 in the West) changed the game as far as society’s tendency toward statism. In the article linked in my sig, I wrote:

@AJ

I now offer four major driving forces that stabilize society by moving it toward the “market anarchy” that AnCaps theorize would be the most stable and successful type of social structure.

Interconnectedness, Decentralization, Education, Advancement (IDEA)

I suggest that increases in these four forces are what can and will enable stable anarchy versus the failed anarchies of the past (which were only high in decentralization, but low in the other three).

That is,

Interconnectedness of individuals and institutions (economic relationships, contractual agreements, etc.)
Decentralization of power (the very definition of anarchy)
Education and enlightenment of the people (especially in political economy)
Advancement of economic prosperity and technology (in a word, civilization)

It occurs to me that easy dissemination of information, especially when anyone can do it, boosts all four of these factors to greater or lesser degrees. If the printing press forced rulers to change their ways to a degree, what will the Internet do? Could it alone take the world all the way?

[DarylLloydDavis]

AJ

I like your IDEA; it’s very well developed. But I’m sure I don’t have to tell you that government isn’t a frog at the bottom of a water-filled pot on a hot burner: No more matter how slowly you try to kill it, or how subtly, it will sense the danger. I do agree, though, that the internet is very decentralizing and enlightening–a crucial first step toward true human progress.

I know you’ll despise the notion of it; but I wrote a new U.S. Constitution establishing a direct democracy, in large part to act as a roadmap to that human progress. The People have to cease the partisan proxy wars and take responsibility for their own lives, as an element of letting government go. The hope is that reason and experience will show them that local autonomy is a vast improvement over centrailized control–and the more the better.

If interested at all, click on the book icon for a preview of it: http://www.amazon.com/New-American-Constitution-Democracy-Alternative/dp/1463666837/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325460669&sr=1-1

[Wheylous]

Holy crap, you actually wrote that Just noticed.

[DarylLloydDavis]

Wheylous

Holy crap, you actually wrote that Just noticed

If you’re talking to me, DLD; yes, I wrote that.

[Wheylous]

Hey, you believe in IP?

[DarylLloydDavis]

Wheylous

Hey, you believe in IP?

Sorry, if you’re not talking to me; but what does IP stand for?

[Amanojack]

@DarylLloydDavis

I wrote a new U.S. Constitution establishing a direct democracy

The market is a direct democracy.

[DarylLloydDavis]

AJ

The market is a direct democracy.

Then I can count on your vote!?!!

Seriously, though, I don’t know how to make a link to another post; so I’ll just ask you to go to the end of the “Private Police–Mall Cops with M-16’s” thread, where I responded fully to Jargon’s post about the problem of a free-market society.

[Wheylous]

Next to “reply”, you see “more”. Click on that. Go to “send to friend.” A popup will apear and you will be able to copy the link off of the html code.

what does IP stand for

Intellectual Property rights

[Jargon]

Seriously, though, I don’t know how to make a link to another post; so I’ll just ask you to go to the end of the “Private Police–Mall Cops with M-16’s” thread, where I responded fully to Jargon’s post about the problem of a free-market society.

It’s not over!!!

[DarylLloydDavis]

Wheylous

Next to “reply”, you see “more”. Click on that. Go to “send to friend.” A popup will apear and you will be able to copy the link off of the html code.

what does IP stand for

Intellectual Property rights

Thanks again, Wheylous. And, yes, I believe in having the sole right to make money from one’s own creation; but I’m not so sure about being the only one with the right to publish it–or share it. I realize that that means that music artists lose money when people download songs; but once a person buys the song, they ought to be able to do whatever they want with it: it’s their property. The same would be true if someone shared my work with others. I’d just have to make money in other ways. This promotes the spread of artistic and intellectual creativity and enlightenment, as well.