Would the U.S. implode? How long would it take? It would force us all to defend ourselves - kind of like an "every man for himself" type of deal. Would you like that?
Would the U.S. implode? How long would it take? It would force us all to defend ourselves - kind of like an "every man for himself" type of deal. Would you like that?
Anarchy never really exists because there is always a "biggest fish" who makes the rules. In primitive communities, the ruling figure is a despot, and there are usually several of them competiting for dominance at any given time. This is the situation in Somolia. The liberals who characterize Somolia as being the living embodiment of "libertarianism" are intellectual failures who are either unwilling or unable to observe the simplest definitions and make the simplest distinctions. They put their stupidity/dishonesty on clear display for everyone else to see, which is why they've blown the public's confidence since assuming control in 2008. If the current US government were to collapse, either something else would emerge to take its place, or the county would split into factions with their own political structures. The best form of government is a constitutional Republic based on the concept of individual rights, with taxes being minimal and largely voluntary.
We would probably just walk around in circles occasionally bumping into each other and/or walls. The government gives our lives the structure we need you silly little dunderhead.
Ho Hum wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia
"Indicators of Somali welfare remain low in absolute terms, but compared to their status under government show a marked advance. Under statelessness life expectancy in Somalia has grown, access to health facilities has increased, infant mortality has dropped, civil liberties have expanded, and extreme poverty (less than $1 PPP/day) has plummeted. In many parts of the country even security has improved. In these areas citizens are safer than they’ve been in three decades (UNDP 2001). Somalia is far from prosperous, but it has made considerable strides since
its government collapsed..."
http://namcub.accela-labs.com/pdf/Better_Off_Stateless.pdfAlso, specifically in regards to the defense of ourselves, here's an old paper that might be of interest. Through a study of the old west they explored the common ACist claims that:
1) Anarchocapitalism is not chaos. Property rights will be protected and civil order will prevail.
2) Private agencies will provide the necessary functions for preservation of an orderly society.
3) Private protection agencies will soon discover that "warfare" is a costly way of resolving disputes and lower-cost methods of settlement (arbitration, courts, etc.) will result.
4) The concept of 'Justice" is not an immutable one that only needs to be discovered. Preferences do vary across individuals as to the rules they prefer to live under and the price they are willing to pay for such rules. Therefore, significant differences in rules might exist in various societies under anarcho-capitalism.
5) There are not significant enough economies of scale in crime so that major "mafia" organizations evolve and dominate society.
6) Competition among protective agencies and adjudication bodies will serve as healthy checks on undesirable behavior. Consumers have better information than under government and will use it in judging these agencies.
The Road
Mexico would invade and take over.
Easy. We would get together and form a government.
Rational Economics wrote:
... The best form of government is a constitutional Republic based on the concept of individual rights, with taxes being minimal and largely voluntary.
Taxes minimal and largely voluntary? What do you mean by a "voluntary" tax?
No taxes would mean the end of Letsrun as we know it!
Here is the way it is wrote:
Taxes minimal and largely voluntary? What do you mean by a "voluntary" tax?
Ideally, the government would be funded entirely by voluntary contributions. Rational men would be willing to pay for a government that protects their rights. The budget of a proper government would be small, so the amount of voluntary contributions needed would be much less than the amount of stolen money needed to fund our current government.
That is the same ideal world where communism works (each according to their needs). You can get it to work in small communities where everyone knows everyone and things like shame can keep people in line.
Rational Economics wrote:
Here is the way it is wrote:Taxes minimal and largely voluntary? What do you mean by a "voluntary" tax?
Ideally, the government would be funded entirely by voluntary contributions. Rational men would be willing to pay for a government that protects their rights. The budget of a proper government would be small, so the amount of voluntary contributions needed would be much less than the amount of stolen money needed to fund our current government.
asdfasdfas wrote:
That is the same ideal world where communism works (each according to their needs). You can get it to work in small communities where everyone knows everyone and things like shame can keep people in line.
No, it isn't the same. The difference is that capitalists are rational and communists are not. Men are capable of choosing to be rational, so a government funded by voluntary taxation is possible. But human nature (selfishness) will always prevent communism from working.
The rational thing to do is to have your neighbor pay for the services you use. And that is what capitalists do.
Political Philosophy wrote:
asdfasdfas wrote:That is the same ideal world where communism works (each according to their needs). You can get it to work in small communities where everyone knows everyone and things like shame can keep people in line.
No, it isn't the same. The difference is that capitalists are rational and communists are not. Men are capable of choosing to be rational, so a government funded by voluntary taxation is possible. But human nature (selfishness) will always prevent communism from working.
And no hell below us? No heaven above us? You who who who who You may think that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.
Actually, that would be what communism is supposed to become.
Won't happen, no how no way.
You would have one of two things: 1) facsism: the real kind where the corporation is the state. All of the business interests would become the government. All aspects of life would be controlled by various board of directors acting in the best interest of their shareholders. Or, 2) anarcho-syndicalism: No heirarchy. Any organization would be created by free association. This actually existed for a short period of time in Catalonia, Spain. People organized production and commerce based on citizen councils. Economic growth under anarcho-syndicalism was actually quite impressive. The real problem with the Catalonian anarcho-syndicalism was that there was no government heirarchy to provide for military defense. Thus, Franco squashed the communes like bugs (it is estimated that he killed over 200,000 political dissidents).
asdfsda wrote:
Would the U.S. implode? How long would it take? It would force us all to defend ourselves - kind of like an "every man for himself" type of deal. Would you like that?
The world would be a much better place.
Yes.