If Anarchy can work, how come there are no historical records of it working?

[oakpacific]

Bear in mind that once upon a time, the communist leadership in China believed that they could teach rice farmers to refine iron and make alloy steel in grass fired clay kilns across the countryside; and that was how they were going to be able to keep those evil capitalist American navies out of their business.

Really?

I mean, I know bureaucrats are out of touch with reality, but this strains credulity.

It's not the bureaucrats' feat, but that of the revolutionaries. Bureaucrats wanted to maintain the status quo, revolutionaries wanted to change(read: impose their ideals of Utopia upon common folks) something, thus the tragedy.

One generation's revolutionary is the next generation's bureaucrat.  That was a great part of the problem; Mao lived in an information bubble of his own making.  He didn't trust the "intellectuals" but those whom he did trust were no more worthy of such faith, and tended to be less informed upon the subjects for which they were expected to advise than the intellectuals who proceeded them.  Like anyone else, they were just trying to maintain the little fiefdoms that they had built up during the revolutionary period, even if that required deceiving the monarch in order to maintain political favor.

Yup exactly(in fact it's even worse, with the intellectuals evicted, the honest peasants refused to fill in the positions left by them, as they knew they are not qualified for such work, those who in the end occupying those positions were then, literally, thugs), so if it ends up being the same, better no revolution which causes far more deaths then you can possibly imagine during the peaceful times.

Aside from that, the Great Leap Forward had much to do with Mao's revolutionary ideal(yeah, he was a peasant, he should have known, right?)

[1714034089]

1714034089

[1714034089]

1714034089

[ktttn]

But what about the punk movement....... Oh...... erm never mind

Andy B

"A punk rock song won't ever change the world, but I can tell you about a couple that changed me!"
Johnny Hobo And The Freight Trains
There's something to be said about otherness for the sake of otherness. Empathy toward oppressed people is easier if you can get the flavor in your mouth.
Poor-ish people actively and enthusiastically rejecting sets of values as a cultural bonding mechanism can be a lovely way to direct chaos into squatting, art and travel.
Anarchy is order, State Capitalism is a buggy glitch. History is an interesting library, but anyone interested is going to realize that that library doesn't have everything.
Next time any of you see a filthy, beer swilling, heroin addicted trainhopping tattoo-faced scumbag, strike up a conversation about bitcoin, willya?
I dunno. I had very little hope for the world before I got into bitcoin.

[ktttn]

This month marks the 20th anniversary of its demolition.

Sounds to me like it did not work.

It did work, read the diagram. Just because they decided to do something else with it doesn't mean it didn't "work" it was a completely functioning city of anarchy.

You sound like a mother doting over her mutant child. From the photos it was clearly a disgusting slum yet you're totally like "it was WORKING!"

WTF dude? Snap out of it. No running water or other basic amenities by the sounds of it. Combine that with all the other horrible shit that can be guessed at a glance:
-overcrowded buildings + not enough sunlight = endemic mould and lung problems
-heat escapes at night due to non-existent building standards = many deaths from hypothermia, fire outbreaks and/or CO poisoning...
-no space to bury the dead.

We do know that our modern ideas of taxation based on consent, individual freedom and so on evolved between the War of the Roses and the English Civil War. 

Now I think you're using a funny definition of "consent." By definition, taxation applies even to those who do not consent, else it wouldn't be taxation.

Taxation is: making tyrants such as yourself pay your dues, even though everyone knows you'll be kicking and screaming against being "brutally forced" against your will.

A mother should dote a bit, don't you agree?
What caused this to happen, for this bastard mutant community to exist? The state set up the parameters.
Running water, an amenity as it can fairly be called isnt as basic as it might seem. When a state takes control of a resource, people lose.
The state presuming to insist on mandatory taxes sets people up to fend for themselves or suffer, most often both.
To survive at all outside that paradigm while still being crowded by it and under its thumb is a proof of concept, albeit a sloppy one.

[myrkul]

We do know that our modern ideas of taxation based on consent, individual freedom and so on evolved between the War of the Roses and the English Civil War. 

Now I think you're using a funny definition of "consent." By definition, taxation applies even to those who do not consent, else it wouldn't be taxation.

Taxation is: making tyrants such as yourself pay your dues, even though everyone knows you'll be kicking and screaming against being "brutally forced" against your will.

I like how you call me a tyrant for only wanting to pay for the services I want and use.

Try all you want, you can't make voluntaryism into a bad thing.

[wdmw]

Taxation is: making tyrants such as yourself pay your dues, even though everyone knows you'll be kicking and screaming against being "brutally forced" against your will.

I like how you call me a tyrant for only wanting to pay for the services I want and use.

Try all you want, you can't make voluntaryism into a bad thing.

It's not voluntary if you're forcing people to not harm each other with your tyrannical non-aggression principle!  What about the murderers, thieves, bullies, and rapists, huh?  What makes you better than them, huh?

Also, Tyrant!!

[myrkul]

Taxation is: making tyrants such as yourself pay your dues, even though everyone knows you'll be kicking and screaming against being "brutally forced" against your will.

I like how you call me a tyrant for only wanting to pay for the services I want and use.

Try all you want, you can't make voluntaryism into a bad thing.

It's not voluntary if you're forcing people to not harm each other with your tyrannical non-aggression principle!  What about the murderers, thieves, bullies, and rapists, huh?  What makes you better than them, huh?

Also, Tyrant!!

You're right... I'm a bad person. And so is George.

[Zarathustra]

http://mises.org/daily/1121

There are.  Here is one that lasted for longer than the United States has been an independent country, before they had their first civil war.

That was not Anarchy. That was Patriarchy. Matrilineal Communities 'are the only historical records of it working'.

[myrkul]

http://mises.org/daily/1121

There are.  Here is one that lasted for longer than the United States has been an independent country, before they had their first civil war.

That was not Anarchy.

I'd be interested in what you would actually consider anarchy, then... Because the Icelandic commonwealth is one of the best historical examples, as is the Somali Xeer law system.

[Zarathustra]

http://mises.org/daily/1121

There are.  Here is one that lasted for longer than the United States has been an independent country, before they had their first civil war.

That was not Anarchy.

I'd be interested in what you would actually consider anarchy, then... Because the Icelandic commonwealth is one of the best historical examples, as is the Somali Xeer law system.

Anarchy is the non-patriarchal, non-monogamous, autark, selfsufficient, matrilineal community, which is not taxed and dominated by masters, rulers, strangers. That was human being until the neolithic revolution, and, at some few remaining territories, until today.

Most 'libertarian anarchists' believe in individualism as the opposite of collectivism. They are wrong. Individualism exists exclusively in collectivist (state) organisations of 'citizens'. The opposite of collectivism/individualism of the citizen is the human in the self sufficient community. A citizen is not a human, at best an undead cartoon of it, as I wrote already in another thread.

[myrkul]

http://mises.org/daily/1121

There are.  Here is one that lasted for longer than the United States has been an independent country, before they had their first civil war.

That was not Anarchy.

I'd be interested in what you would actually consider anarchy, then... Because the Icelandic commonwealth is one of the best historical examples, as is the Somali Xeer law system.

Anarchy is the non-patriarchal, non-monogamous, autark, selfsufficient, matrilineal community, which is not taxed and dominated by masters, rulers, strangers.

So, only an agrarian, matrilinear society is truly free?

You have a very limited world-view.

[ktttn]

Anarchy is the non-patriarchal, non-monogamous, autark, selfsufficient, matrilineal community, which is not taxed and dominated by masters, rulers, strangers.

So, only an agrarian, matrilinear society is truly free?

You have a very limited world-view.

...said the capitalist.

A mother should dote a bit, don't you agree?

OK, it was a bad metaphor (and unfair on mums/moms everywhere). Point is: doting over what was basically a collection of human tragedies and labelling them a successful city is evidence of an overflow of emotions clouding rational judgement. (But of course, according to some people round here I'm a psychopath without empathy, so it's clearly a case of "pot calling the kettle black").

What caused this to happen, for this bastard mutant community to exist? The state set up the parameters.

If the state was ultimately in charge then how could it have been anarchy?

Running water, an amenity as it can fairly be called isnt as basic as it might seem. When a state takes control of a resource, people lose.

Fair point that it's not so 'basic' -- the infrastructure has been evolving for 1000s of years.
However, I'm not sure what's worse:
-a 'state' where at least you have voting rights, some transparency in the hierarchy (if it's not true then you've gotta fight for it!) in charge of water, so you know who to blame when you're dying of thirst.
-private industry, a monopoly, Mafia -- anyone but the state -- in charge of water (because the 'state' doesn't exist) and even less recourse if you're dying of thirst.
It seems obvious to me that for such a precious resource as water, someone is going to want to control it. In a power vacuum such as Anarchy, even if many different groups try to control water supply (too many cooks..??), some will be more successful at it than others. If a market-based system is adopted (e.g.: An-Cap because of pro-Capitalist ideology), people who can't pay will be deprived of water. And the problem with 'charity' is that it's basically "inefficient socialism" in disguise. Guilt-tripping is hard to market.

Sucessessful? Who labeled it that? The only point is that they figured out how to survive without state assistance. I might grant that achievement a measure of success, wouldnt you?
No recourse equals no recourse equals no recourse, whether one is surrounded by lunatics that tell you about how they own all the water or not.

[MoonShadow]

http://mises.org/daily/1121

There are.  Here is one that lasted for longer than the United States has been an independent country, before they had their first civil war.

That was not Anarchy. That was Patriarchy. Matrilineal Communities 'are the only historical records of it working'.

The perfect is the enemy of the good.  There are no perfect examples of a free market, or of a communist nation, or even an absolute monarchy either.

[MoonShadow]

Anarchy is the non-patriarchal, non-monogamous, autark, selfsufficient, matrilineal community, which is not taxed and dominated by masters, rulers, strangers.

So, only an agrarian, matrilinear society is truly free?

You have a very limited world-view.

...said the capitalist.

Myrkul isn't a capitalist in any real sense.  Most people don't even know what it means.  I'd wager that you don't really do either.

[myrkul]

Here's an exercise for you:

I suppose it's only in my mind that if I don't pay to support the bombing of innocents on the other side of the planet, men with "IRS" on the back of their jackets and pistols at their hip will show up at my door and "politely" inquire as to why?

Myrkul isn't a capitalist in any real sense.  Most people don't even know what it means.  I'd wager that you don't really do either.

Well, it's a made-up term, coined by an enemy of the system it represents. One who didn't fully understand that system. It's bound to be wrapped up in all kinds of confusion.

[ktttn]

Myrkul isn't a capitalist in any real sense.  Most people don't even know what it means.  I'd wager that you don't really do either.

Well, it's a made-up term, coined by an enemy of the system it represents. One who didn't fully understand that system. It's bound to be wrapped up in all kinds of confusion.

Printing and framing this quote.
I wish I could have gotten Myrkul to say something acknowledging that the burning rats nest we call capitalism is a complex misnomer.
Folks with a good grip on how to identify sociopolitical -isms are about one in a billion.

[MoonShadow]

Myrkul isn't a capitalist in any real sense.  Most people don't even know what it means.  I'd wager that you don't really do either.

Well, it's a made-up term, coined by an enemy of the system it represents. One who didn't fully understand that system. It's bound to be wrapped up in all kinds of confusion.

Printing and framing this quote.
I wish I could have gotten Myrkul to say something acknowledging that the burning rats nest I call capitalism is a complex misnomer.
Folks with a good grip on how to identify sociopolitical -isms are about one in a billion.

Fixed that for you.

[ktttn]

Myrkul isn't a capitalist in any real sense.  Most people don't even know what it means.  I'd wager that you don't really do either.

Well, it's a made-up term, coined by an enemy of the system it represents. One who didn't fully understand that system. It's bound to be wrapped up in all kinds of confusion.

Printing and framing this quote.
I wish I could have gotten Myrkul to say something acknowledging that the burning rats nest I call capitalism is a complex misnomer.
Folks with a good grip on how to identify sociopolitical -isms are about one in a billion.

Fixed that for you.

But I'm not the only one. We do call that mess capitalism and with reason. Is your definition unlike a burning rats nest?
Also, there is a distinct 'we' that sees that anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron.
Then again, this isn't a capitalism thread.

[myrkul]

Also, there is a distinct 'we' that sees that anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron.

Indeed there is. And that's because that group's definition of "capitalism" requires a State. It's like saying "anti-State statism."

Capitalism, as properly defined, even using the terms Marx used, is simply private ownership of the means of production. A carpenter who owns his own tools is practicing capitalism, as is the owner of a chair factory. That doesn't need a State, merely the respect of the people for the right of the individual to own property.

[myrkul]

Here's an exercise for you:

I suppose it's only in my mind... [IRS and other unrelated bullshit...]

Well if you're going ignore what I wrote and instead use it as a vehicle to push your whiny propaganda, you might as well not click on "show post".

Your understanding of freedom is very narrow, so if you don't want to open your mind, it's your loss not mine.

It's not my fault you don't understand what objections I have to the State. If you don't want to open your mind, it's your loss, not mine.

Let me rephrase:
I suppose it's only in my mind that if I grow a certain plant, people with DEA on the back of their jackets and pistols on their hips will come and throw me in a cage?

[Zarathustra]

But I'm not the only one. We do call that mess capitalism and with reason. Is your definition unlike a burning rats nest?
Also, there is a distinct 'we' that sees that anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron.
Then again, this isn't a capitalism thread.

Anarcho-capitalism is indeed an oxymoron. There is (and has never been) no such thing as an anarchic, unruled, untaxed economy/market/capitalism. Capitalism is collectivism and always a state bastard. Anarchy is the self-sufficiency of a blood-community and therefore the absence of economic interaction with outsiders.