How long would it take for Anarchy to start working?

[deisik]

So you implicitly suggest that all people share the same principles of life and moral values. It may be true for a small isolated group of people and your idea of ostracism and outlawry may actually work between them. But if you take some larger proportion of population and apply this principle among them you will see tensions arise and eventually you will end up with fractions denying and neglecting each other (if not fighting)...

Probably. But if they have their own spaces, like minded people will gather. They may even decide to form coercive governments. But if decentralization is common, and people have learned to be independent, those will be pockets.

But what about economics? To sustain the achieved standard of life we need that tight hierarchical integration between people (ironically called division of labor) which most anarchists loathe as much as they are afraid of...

[Biomech]

So you implicitly suggest that all people share the same principles of life and moral values. It may be true for a small isolated group of people and your idea of ostracism and outlawry may actually work between them. But if you take some larger proportion of population and apply this principle among them you will see tensions arise and eventually you will end up with fractions denying and neglecting each other (if not fighting)...

Probably. But if they have their own spaces, like minded people will gather. They may even decide to form coercive governments. But if decentralization is common, and people have learned to be independent, those will be pockets.

But what about economics? To sustain the achieved standard of life we need that tight hierarchical integration between people (ironically called division of labor) which most anarchists loathe as much as they are afraid of...

WHY??? Why must you push those big shiny buttons when I'm dead!! (J.k). I'm going to eat. Then I'm going to sleep. Then I'm going to celebrate my son's seventh birthday.

After that, I'm going to start writing. Economics actually led me to anarchy (agorism), and I can answer all of the questions you and crumbs and several others have posed in great detail. This is my obsession. I have written about three quarters of a book called "anarchy is not chaos", and it addresses most of this. Unfortunately, right now if my wife yelled "Kevin!" I might not realize she was talking to me, or about me for that matter. Don't get old. You lose the creativity of insomnia.

[deisik]

WHY??? Why must you push those big shiny buttons when I'm dead!! (J.k). I'm going to eat. Then I'm going to sleep. Then I'm going to celebrate my son's seventh birthday.

So you decided to share with us some piece of crap thought here and hoped to get away with it, right?

[Biomech]

WHY??? Why must you push those big shiny buttons when I'm dead!! (J.k). I'm going to eat. Then I'm going to sleep. Then I'm going to celebrate my son's seventh birthday.

So you decided to share with us some piece of crap thought here and hoped to get away with it, right?

But of course! LOL

[Mike Christ]

So you implicitly suggest that all people share the same principles of life and moral values. It may be true for a small isolated group of people and your idea of ostracism and outlawry may actually work between them. But if you take some larger proportion of population and apply this principle among them you will see tensions arise and eventually you will end up with fractions denying and neglecting each other (if not fighting)...

Probably. But if they have their own spaces, like minded people will gather. They may even decide to form coercive governments. But if decentralization is common, and people have learned to be independent, those will be pockets.

But what about economics? To sustain the achieved standard of life we need that tight hierarchical integration between people (ironically called division of labor) which most anarchists loathe as much as they are afraid of...

Would you do business with someone who used slave labor?

If not, and the other people you do business with agreed this was bad, the slave owner would either need to stop owning slaves or go out of business
If so, and the other people you do business with agreed this was bad, you put yourself at risk of going out of business along with the slave owner

I won't bother with a society which believes this is good for nobody wants to be enslaved, and a society which cannot grasp something as simple as empathy surely has no capacity to survive as anarchists for long; they're too busy installing a state.

Thus, the incentive of using slave labor is killed; the last resort is to ask the state to protect your slave-owning habits, but since that can't happen in a society of rationals, for what rational seeks a guiding force but his own, it's effectively squashed and business continues as usual.  Behold, ostracism.

Also: for the same reason that the rational does not need the state to dictate his actions, the rational has no need for a hierarchy of business; since every worker is equipped with the mental skills needed to run a business (it's kind of sad to note that they currently don't, despite 14 years of involuntary "education"), they can very easily form businesses together and share their wealth with each other as they see fit.  What good is a corporate empire on the local level?--it's just extra overhead for the worker, who gets what's left trickled from the top of the pyramid as our current system is now, and accepts it as he cannot see any other way to make a living, nor was he provided the skills required to see why it's screwing him over (though he will constantly complain about it to his peers) thanks to the corporate empire's bed buddy, the state, where there is no incentive to produce thinking adults via the educational system, merely productive ones.

[beetcoin]

So you implicitly suggest that all people share the same principles of life and moral values. It may be true for a small isolated group of people and your idea of ostracism and outlawry may actually work between them. But if you take some larger proportion of population and apply this principle among them you will see tensions arise and eventually you will end up with fractions denying and neglecting each other (if not fighting)...

Probably. But if they have their own spaces, like minded people will gather. They may even decide to form coercive governments. But if decentralization is common, and people have learned to be independent, those will be pockets.

But what about economics? To sustain the achieved standard of life we need that tight hierarchical integration between people (ironically called division of labor) which most anarchists loathe as much as they are afraid of...

Would you do business with someone who used slave labor?

If not, and the other people you do business with agreed this was bad, the slave owner would either need to stop owning slaves or go out of business
If so, and the other people you do business with agreed this was bad, you put yourself at risk of going out of business along with the slave owner

I won't bother with a society which believes this is good for nobody wants to be enslaved, and a society which cannot grasp something as simple as empathy surely has no capacity to survive as anarchists for long; they're too busy installing a state.

Thus, the incentive of using slave labor is killed; the last resort is to ask the state to protect your slave-owning habits, but since that can't happen in a society of rationals, for what rational seeks a guiding force but his own, it's effectively squashed and business continues as usual.  Behold, ostracism.

Also: for the same reason that the rational does not need the state to dictate his actions, the rational has no need for a hierarchy of business; since every worker is equipped with the mental skills needed to run a business (it's kind of sad to note that they currently don't, despite 14 years of involuntary "education"), they can very easily form businesses together and share their wealth with each other as they see fit.  What good is a corporate empire on the local level?--it's just extra overhead for the worker, who gets what's left trickled from the top of the pyramid as our current system is now, and accepts it as he cannot see any other way to make a living, nor was he provided the skills required to see why it's screwing him over (though he will constantly complain about it to his peers) thanks to the corporate empire's bed buddy, the state, where there is no incentive to produce thinking adults via the educational system, merely productive ones.

isn't this wishful thinking? you're saying that nobody would own slaves because it's bad.. but you know what? the past is an indicator of the future, and throughout most of mankind's history, we've had slaves. in a dystopian society, which is what would happen under a worldwide anarchist government, i'm sure the few bad guys wouldn't mind owning slaves.

[deisik]

But what about economics? To sustain the achieved standard of life we need that tight hierarchical integration between people (ironically called division of labor) which most anarchists loathe as much as they are afraid of...

Would you do business with someone who used slave labor?

If not, and the other people you do business with agreed this was bad, the slave owner would either need to stop owning slaves or go out of business
If so, and the other people you do business with agreed this was bad, you put yourself at risk of going out of business along with the slave owner

I have to confess that I can't say for sure if I would do business with the guys using slave labor (or some variety thereof) since I have never yet been there, but I definitely try to avoid people who knowingly sell stolen things...

But it doesn't actually matter if I in particular would do business with them or not. I personally know many people who would buy stolen things without ever thinking whether it's good or bad. I have absolutely no doubts these same people would deal in with someone using slave labor without much remorse about it. And I have to admit that some of them would even be happy to employ some slave labor if there is an opportunity

And they would do business between themselves whether I like it or not... 

[deisik]

I won't bother with a society which believes this is good for nobody wants to be enslaved, and a society which cannot grasp something as simple as empathy surely has no capacity to survive as anarchists for long; they're too busy installing a state.

So, according to your logic, we should implicitly come to a conclusion that any state would authorize slavery because it is established by people lacking empathy and thus approving slavery...

Do you know how this style of reasoning is called?

[deisik]

Thus, the incentive of using slave labor is killed; the last resort is to ask the state to protect your slave-owning habits, but since that can't happen in a society of rationals, for what rational seeks a guiding force but his own, it's effectively squashed and business continues as usual.  Behold, ostracism

I think you would agree there are many forms of slave labor starting from underpayment, so in a sense any businessman hiring people could be treated as a slave holder of a kind... If what you alluded to but didn't say directly were true, we would not have such activities as illegal drugs trade (remember Silk Road?), murder-for-hire, child pornography and the stuff like that (and yes, slavery too)

[deisik]

Also: for the same reason that the rational does not need the state to dictate his actions, the rational has no need for a hierarchy of business; since every worker is equipped with the mental skills needed to run a business (it's kind of sad to note that they currently don't, despite 14 years of involuntary "education"), they can very easily form businesses together and share their wealth with each other as they see fit.  What good is a corporate empire on the local level?--it's just extra overhead for the worker, who gets what's left trickled from the top of the pyramid as our current system is now, and accepts it as he cannot see any other way to make a living, nor was he provided the skills required to see why it's screwing him over (though he will constantly complain about it to his peers) thanks to the corporate empire's bed buddy, the state, where there is no incentive to produce thinking adults via the educational system, merely productive ones.

They say that only some small percentage of population have mental skills needed to run a business and I have to agree with them. And even if you have these skills in you (among them not the last the trait which allows you to make people do what you want and how you want it, i.e. to be a dictator of some kind) you can't directly control a number of people beyond some limit. So, given the present depth of the division of labor, we really have no other options left but to build those multilevel corporate pyramids... As simple as that!

[deisik]

isn't this wishful thinking? you're saying that nobody would own slaves because it's bad.. but you know what? the past is an indicator of the future, and throughout most of mankind's history, we've had slaves. in a dystopian society, which is what would happen under a worldwide anarchist government, i'm sure the few bad guys wouldn't mind owning slaves.

Slavery is built into human nature and it's exactly the state which is constraining it. But the primary reasons for this are not empathy and all other such things but rather economic ones. The present level of technological development makes slavery obsolete because under present conditions it is an inefficient form of organizing human labor...

Take any primitive society and they beyond doubt would have slave labor... Even ants have slaves!

[Ekaros]

isn't this wishful thinking? you're saying that nobody would own slaves because it's bad.. but you know what? the past is an indicator of the future, and throughout most of mankind's history, we've had slaves. in a dystopian society, which is what would happen under a worldwide anarchist government, i'm sure the few bad guys wouldn't mind owning slaves.

Slavery is built into human nature and it's exactly the state which is constraining it. But the primary reasons for this are not empathy and all other such things but rather economic ones. The present level of technological development makes slavery obsolete because under present conditions it is an inefficient form of organizing human labor...

Take any primitive society and they beyond doubt would have slave labor... Even ants have slaves!

The reality is that near slave like conditions still exist in some cases in West. Often even with apperance of everything being right. And the victims might not even understand they are slaves...

I understand that slave like labour has been used atleast in some restoraunts here. That is for labour intensive stuff that can't be always automated.

On other hand for many things it's not just cost effective anymore. Farming, mining and so on, much cheaper to get machines...

[deisik]

The reality is that near slave like conditions still exist in some cases in West. Often even with apperance of everything being right. And the victims might not even understand they are slaves...

I understand that slave like labour has been used atleast in some restoraunts here. That is for labour intensive stuff that can't be always automated.

On other hand for many things it's not just cost effective anymore. Farming, mining and so on, much cheaper to get machines...

That's what I'm talking about. You can take any successful businessman and after some harsh scraping you will get a slaveholder in disguise...

[dank]

Slavery is not anarchism.  Anarchism involves freedom and communal efforts as humanity.

Debt is slavery.

[Hawker]

Slavery is not anarchism.  Anarchism involves freedom and communal efforts as humanity.

Debt is slavery.

Surely there would be debt in an anarchist society?

[crumbs]

Slavery is not anarchism.  Anarchism involves freedom and communal efforts as humanity.

Debt is slavery.

Surely there would be debt in an anarchist society?

Come the revolution and everyone will eat strawberries and cream! -- Willie Howard
After midnight It's all gonna be peaches and cream -- Eric Clapton

[dank]

Slavery is not anarchism.  Anarchism involves freedom and communal efforts as humanity.

Debt is slavery.

Surely there would be debt in an anarchist society?

Until we grow past money.

[Ekaros]

Slavery is not anarchism.  Anarchism involves freedom and communal efforts as humanity.

Debt is slavery.

Surely there would be debt in an anarchist society?

Until we grow past money.

How long that would take?

[deisik]

I think those of you, guys, who deem themselves as anarchists are terribly misusing the term...
Considering what you say here (small isolated settlements, ostracism, communal efforts and all that nonsense) I would rather call you hippies...

Or maybe an anarchist is just an age-worn hippie?

[dank]

Slavery is not anarchism.  Anarchism involves freedom and communal efforts as humanity.

Debt is slavery.

Surely there would be debt in an anarchist society?

Until we grow past money.

How long that would take?

It can take years but only a matter of hours to actually happen.

I think those of you, guys, who deem themselves as anarchists are terribly misusing the term...
Considering what you say here (small isolated settlements, ostracism, communal efforts and all that nonsense) I would rather call you hippies...

Or maybe an anarchist is just an age-worn hippie?

You're attempts at discrediting anarchism are futile.