cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
To me anarchy equals reduction to a Road Warrior-type society. cn
But what about the roads? Common argument against Libertarian/Anarchy Debunked.
- Thread starter deprave
- Start date
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
Perhaps. It might be even more primitive. I view Road Warrior as a look at the first couple of years after the "event". Not long after that, the fuel runs out, the machines stop and Ted Kazinsky's paradise is a reality.
Cut.Throat.
Well-Known Member
Scary enough this is why I became a prepper. Read "one second after" and did some research and realized it's entirely plausible.
All it takes is one pissed off country with a nuke to send us back to the stone ages. EMPs are a scary scenario.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Well heck. I can't support that. cn
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
How I see it is this. There would be a general fund to fix roads in each metropolitan area. Personal to group vehicles would be AI controlled for most efficient use of each vehicle and road conditions.
This would allow the most people with the cheapest travel. The system can be audited by any individual for waste and fraud. That can't be done with the current system.
With the money saved, we could afford to supply more rural areas with what our current major cities have.
And Deprave, you're stealing my thunder. This is my area of expertise. I've spent years studying this subject.
A great novel on this subject is the Dispossessed by Ursula Leguine.
Gifting isn't a new concept. The early humans started out that way. It's only recently that massive gifting has taken place with online communities like this one. You only get into discussions about gift economies in PHD level course study. It's because until recently experts argued gifting only works at the very familiar level, or else implied reciprocation is required.
This would allow the most people with the cheapest travel. The system can be audited by any individual for waste and fraud. That can't be done with the current system.
With the money saved, we could afford to supply more rural areas with what our current major cities have.
And Deprave, you're stealing my thunder. This is my area of expertise. I've spent years studying this subject.
A great novel on this subject is the Dispossessed by Ursula Leguine.
Gifting isn't a new concept. The early humans started out that way. It's only recently that massive gifting has taken place with online communities like this one. You only get into discussions about gift economies in PHD level course study. It's because until recently experts argued gifting only works at the very familiar level, or else implied reciprocation is required.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
Well, there is always, "You can shovel shit, can't you?", Thunder Dome. I woulda shoveled Tina's shit just to tap that. We never found out what happened to Barter Town after they lost the little guy. I think they rapidly fell apart after losing their source of power. Another post apocalyptic ghost town.
I would charge a tax on my road. And I would lay spikes so that people may increase the chance they damage their vehicles on my road and then sell them new tires. It is a great business opportunity. Just like when Walmart started putting Subways inside the stores. Imagine a tire shop with a spike strip in front. It would be legal as I am sure I could get the other road owners to charge their tolls and we could monopolize travel across our area.
Agreed. It is much simpler to have one central authority.
Though, I have to ask, how we decide who owns what in this Libertarian utopia? If I say it is my land, is it my land? Who is going to stop me?
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
In the Heinlen's novel, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," people like you didn't have to worry, since you became a victim of attrition. You may think you're bad ass here online, but I doubt you'd be pulling stunts like that if it meant risking your life.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I am way, way too behemped to reply to that now. However, I am musing upon the films' use of both dwarves and fetish-leathered mob soldiers. cn
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
umm thats not how roads get built without government. thats not how roads get built at all.
a road is not a monolith of construction that requires all parts to be functional, a road system is a modular thing, especially in rural areas or the third world. local communities build tracks, two-ruts, gravel roads and even paved macs with no help from government, national or local.
high speed throughways are edifices of government control, not transportation or market access. Most of the world before the 20th century (including america) got along perfectly well without colossal highway systems or international airports. even today rural america gets less use from the interstate system than you would imagine, and alaska has nearly no intercommunity highway system at all except on the coast. they still do just fine without adopting any of the ridiculously finestoned political gris-gris of the 98 flavours of "anarchy" that gives semi-wood to the adherents.
the current fad of applying a name to every douchey personal political theory du-jour, and expecting everybody else to know the key points of it's secret club charter crafted by poli-sci dropouts is ludicrous.
if the US constitution is accepted and executed as written, and the federal and state governments operate as intended by our founders within the guidelines set forth, then the tea-party would not exist. trying to label the tea party as a single entity and claim it adheres to some mythical 99th flavour of anarchy is outright bullshit.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
lets have anarchy, only the strong survive!
this coming from the most powerful man in the universe! of course thats ok for you, but i dont have the power to destroy the world itself, i would have to co-operate with all my cousins and shit to create a feudal dominion, and my cousins are mostly assholes! shit, just the goat rapes alone would decimate the ruminant populations, and the sheep wouldnt stand a chance!
anarchy indeed! think of the lambs for god's sake! those poor reamed out lambs!
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I think you confused the Rodney King riots and upcoming Trayvan Martin riots for anarchy.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
meh. you would be shocked at what real country folk can do when the shit hits the fan. Not the self-obsessed dimwits you see on trash "scripted reality" shows on tv either. i mean real Deliverance style hillbillies. The "Ned Beatty gots a purty mouf" rednecks.
my kinfolk would be growin crops, making moonshine as a fuel and as refreshment, diggin out iron to make weapons, crafting gunpowder from it's basic components, and building ecologically un-sound vehicles from random parts from junkyards and the ruins of your cities. mad max? shit son, try Space Hunter Adventures in the Forbidden Zone (1983) a cinema classic, and the real future in any "anarchy" situation, from zombie apocalypse to the cubs winning the world series.
tomahawk2406
Well-Known Member
deprave your not smart for this thread lol. i know you want to believe you hold some secret to a better society. but your proving to me that you spent to much time on the internet. your idea is flat out fucking retarded. i dont know what else to tell you.
deprave
New Member
There is much speculation as to this of course. Now again I cannot possibly answer all of these questions, because the very point of instituting a free market to solve these problems is because it is impossible to predict the best solutions. Again, If I were able to predict how everything would work, then there would be no need for a free society/market and it would be an argument for making me the supreme dictator of the world. I will give you some of my speculation and also popular speculation in political philosophy how Land Ownsership would work. I would really like to hear from people here how they think it might work so we can continue this discussion down a productive path, I am grateful for the people in this thread that dared to speculate this with me.
In a free market, you have constant auctions for scarce resources with each person taking the risk of using the most efficient way to allocate that resource at the price they are bidding for it. And because of this bidding process, not only can you be assured that those scarce resources will go to the person who knows how to allocate them in the most efficient way, because they have the most to lose, but you are now able to calculate profit and loss. Under a central authority there is no way to calculate whether what you are producing with those resources is more valuable than the resources themselves. A real estate developer might claim unused land in an auction or buy already claimed land which for sale. Then he could create a neighborhood of houses that he will rent out under the condition of agreeing to a one-year Home Owners Association contract which would include a monthly fee to be spent on offering services such as neighborhood security, a court, clinic, fire, plumbing, electricity, road maintenance, etc.. Another theory which I won't touch on so much here is the Land Value Tax where people do pay a tax based on the value of their land in the free market. So to address the quoted directly the answer is simply more than likely: contracts, private courts, private security firms, and a new type of "credit scoring" based on contractual obligations.....in short contracts..contracts...and more contracts.
Further, as not to address this quoted directly but to many other in this thread, the claims here in this thread that that private security would create some sort of lawlessness is based largely on science fiction movies. Today there are much more private security employed than police officers. Additionally most disputes today are settled not in state court but by private means.(people like to ignore these facts) Another possibility is protection insurance companies. People could take on insurance policies against being assaulted or stolen from but lets saves that for another time as its a pretty deep topic. The fact is if you really sit and think about it, most matters are settled in private, the private sector is fairly efficient especially without the completely inefficient government involvement.
deprave
New Member
I am not sure how you managed to agree with me completely and at the same time think that you are disagreeing with me. I stated clearly that Tea Party, Minarchy(Republicans), and "Moderate" Libertarians have this view that you have written. Everything after the first paragraph and the rest of the thread included I am arguing on the side of anarchist but in the first paragraph I state that the Libertarian view is that we have a minimal government that provides for this "as written in the constitution"...That is pretty much the end of that discussion so I wanted to have a more interesting thread by arguing for anarchy.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Liberals and democrats are communists, right? Don't get me started with socialists. Them's be debil worshipers!I'm confused. How are you grouping anarchists and libertarians as the same group? You realize they are drastically different right? Might as well say constitutionalists are anti government as well