Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 04:47:57 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: My doubts about anarchy  (Read 17145 times)
FatherMcGruder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322



View Profile WWW
April 09, 2011, 10:42:41 PM
 #121

I also find it hard to fathom how anyone could think that voluntary trade is ever exploitative. If I trade you a loaf of bread for a fish, obviously you value the bread more than the fish and I value the fish more than the bread. If not, why would we voluntarily trade? By trading, we each come away with something we find more valuable than we had originally. We are both better off. How is that exploitative? It's not.
I asked the same question of FatherMcGruder. Still don't understand it to this day.
Actually I did, in practical terms. That site is yet another bogus pseudo-anarchist utopia bs.

which aims to create a society within which individuals freely co-operate together as equals. -> Is it? And what if they don't want to co-op? Will call the cops on them?

As such anarchism opposes all forms of hierarchical control -> Yeah! Everybody does the same... and everybody does nothing.

For all of the anarchist BS you end up always with the same; A HUGE LOAD OF RULES, even worse than the "archists" (with government). And to very bottom a nobody understands how lack of ways to enforce such rules.
Sorry... anarchism is plain non-sense. There's nothing to understand because other than break public stuff and join protests to unleash violence, anarchists themselves can't understand or even conceive in practice their own theories. Are just a sort of political hooligans...
You should read some more of my posts or peruse that FAQ some more.

Then you don't understand anarchism. If you want to know what anarchism is about, ask an anarchist. Here comes one now...

Quote from: Stephan Kinsella
To be an anarchist only means that you believe that aggression is not justified, and that states necessarily employ aggression. And, therefore, that states, and the aggression they necessarily employ, are unjustified. It's quite simple, really. It's an ethical view, so no surprise it confuses utilitarians.

Accordingly, anyone who is not an anarchist must maintain either: (a) aggression is justified; or (b) states (in particular, minimal states) do not necessarily employ aggression.
Stepha Kinsella is not an anarchist. He is a capitalist.

Can you tell me what your definition of "work" is, and how it is decided how much one person should rightfully collect?  This will help me understand your position better.
I've been using the word work to indicate the process of creating something new, or restoring something, by your own labor. That which you create or restore by your own labor is rightfully yours. So, if I go and farm a potato myself, that potato rightfully belongs to me. One can only own the product of some labor if he himself does that labor. So, if someone simply claims to own the farm on which I farmed the potato, a landlord, he does not rightfully own that potato. I believe that people can use markets to determine the value of that which they produce and trade it accordingly. However, under capitalism I cannot freely access a market. I have to go through the landlord, a middleman, who will give me less for the potato than what he can get selling it on the market. He will gain the difference between the market value of the potato and my wage without having done any work. Because I rightfully owned that entire potato, I will have lost that difference. The only way landlords can get away with being landlords is if they have the authority to do so. Either a larger state grants them this authority, or they establishes it themselves by whatever forces they can muster, thereby creating their own little states. If I try to bypass him and keep the potato or the entirety of that which I can get on the market for it, my landlord will persecute me. Capitalists love gaining without doing work and therefore strive to become landlords, employers, and usurers. You can throw intellectual property holder in there, too. But, capitalists cannot be these things without some kind of state.

To be fair, other anarchists have different, non-market ways of valuing and exchanging the products of labor. An Anarchist FAQ describes some, but they don't really appeal to me.

Use my Trade Hill referral code: TH-R11519

Check out bitcoinity.org and Ripple.

Shameless display of my bitcoin address:
1Hio4bqPUZnhr2SWi4WgsnVU1ph3EkusvH
1481388477
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388477

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388477
Reply with quote  #2

1481388477
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481388477
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388477

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388477
Reply with quote  #2

1481388477
Report to moderator
1481388477
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388477

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388477
Reply with quote  #2

1481388477
Report to moderator
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 09, 2011, 10:56:48 PM
 #122

Stepha Kinsella is not an anarchist. He is a capitalist.

"No true Scotsman" fallacy.
BCEmporium
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
April 09, 2011, 11:11:07 PM
 #123

Also you do trade for need, not quite voluntarily.

There is no such thing as need vs. want. All human desires are wants. I want to live. I want to eat. I want to be happy. Etc. There is no need to live or anything else. Needs are just fudge words used in an attempt to make certain desires seem more important.

If you are alone on this Earth, you have to hunt, fish, farm or forage to survive. If you don't, you will die. Is nature somehow forcing you to do any of that stuff against your will? No, that's absurd, you want to live so therefore you do what it takes to survive.

So why is it that when we add other people to this equation, suddenly you start making demands on them? They don't owe you anything. If they offer you some food to do some work, they are only increasing the number of opportunities you have. You could still go hunt, fish, farm or forage to survive, or just lay down and die. The choice is yours and it's all completely voluntary. The world does not owe you a living.

Playing semantics are we... anyway, by your words you ended up stating exactly the core of Anarchy and what it is all about; the worse of Capitalism and extreme individualism.
For the record, nobody owns you nothing also... but probably, because we're a social sort of animal people care about people. Go figure! How silly of them when they could just lay down and die or watch you die.  Grin

Luckily for the human species, Anarchy has 0% chances of survival. You see... the lack of hierarchy makes it the most easy target and sitting duck on the planet, standing no chance whatsoever against even quite small organized armies. Organization is the core of success - even for hunting by the way, taken we're, in the relation speed/strength/size, the weakest and slowest animal around and more up to be a pray than a hunter; unless we use our advantage: Organization and Strategy, that's why we have brains...
BCEmporium
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
April 09, 2011, 11:27:15 PM
 #124

To be fair, other anarchists have different, non-market ways of valuing and exchanging the products of labor. An Anarchist FAQ describes some, but they don't really appeal to me.

The ultimate question over Anarchy is exactly that... "is doesn't appeal you". No matter what FAQs are or not written they represent the vision of one claimed to be Anarchist without any value whatsoever to the whole "Anarchist community", taken under such seams everyone does as he pleases and everybody pleases differently.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 01:52:42 AM
 #125

you ended up stating exactly the core of Anarchy and what it is all about; the worse of Capitalism and extreme individualism.

If anarchy was some kind of fundamentalist individualist philosophy then we'd be opposed to voluntary socialism and even team sports, clubs, etc. I've got no problem with voluntary things like that. In fact, I don't even demand that you embrace capitalism. Anarchy is the only ideology that can accommodate capitalism, socialism, communism, syndicalism, etc, all at once. If you want to go live in a hippie commune, have at it. I'm against aggression, not collectivism. You're welcome to think of yourself as some kind of worker bee or ant. I won't be joining you though. Either you accept my wishes peacefully or you're going to use coercion to bend me to your will. That's all it comes down to, peace or war. It's your choice.
BCEmporium
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 02:19:21 AM
 #126

If anarchy was some kind of fundamentalist individualist philosophy then we'd be opposed to voluntary socialism and even team sports, clubs, etc.

Fallacy! Voluntarism implies "do if you want". If you don't... well... too bad.

Quote
I've got no problem with voluntary things like that. In fact, I don't even demand that you embrace capitalism. Anarchy is the only ideology that can accommodate capitalism, socialism, communism, syndicalism, etc, all at once. If you want to go live in a hippie commune, have at it.

At the very same time allows none... What you say is that within the erratic anarchist society some groups will organize according to Capitalism, others according to Socialism, other according to something else... And yes, there will be groups, humans ARE NOT lone wolves, we're a sort of monkey and act according to our nature! At some point thus the interests of those groups will collide and they will enter at war. Hey! Go figure! Your vision of anarchy is what the world is already if you wide a bit your sight to the global spectrum.

Quote
I'm against aggression, not collectivism.

Again, that's YOU... but YOU in Anarchy are just one member, not a fair representative of anything, due to the kind of (lack of) rule, but yourown.

Quote
You're welcome to think of yourself as some kind of worker bee or ant. I won't be joining you though.

Deny reality doesn't change it. Sorry...

Quote
Either you accept my wishes peacefully or you're going to use coercion to bend me to your will. That's all it comes down to, peace or war. It's your choice.

For what concerns me and as long as you don't cross my space be at will to do whatever you want. However, in this World of Anarchy, I can't say my vision resembles everyone's vision.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 02:26:31 AM
 #127

At some point thus the interests of those groups will collide and they will enter at war.

Yes, there will always be peaceful people that are attacked by others that are violent and coercive. That applies to any system. You are right about anarchy already existing at a global level otherwise there would be one world government. I'm not sure what your point is since all that does is show that anarchy can and does exist.

Again, that's YOU... but YOU in Anarchy are just one member, not a fair representative of anything, due to the kind of (lack of) rule, but yourown.

So, you want to pretend that I'm the only peaceful anarchist?
BCEmporium
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 03:08:16 AM
 #128

I'm not sure what your point is since all that does is show that anarchy can and does exist.

Two different concepts; you're talking of Anarchy on the citizen level, whereas the existent one is on global level. Countries co-exist in Anarchy to each others (to some degree... there's submission either), but citizens doesn't.
This is a matter of practice, actually, Anarchy can exist in very small groups - there're just 200 something countries -, but can't on societies with millions of individuals.

Quote
Yes, there will always be peaceful people that are attacked by others that are violent and coercive.

Wrong! They're both violent and coercive, they just want to impose different views. That baloney of "pacific people that's pushed to war" makes no sense at all!

Quote
So, you want to pretend that I'm the only peaceful anarchist?

Nope, but that being Anarchy you are just you, not able to speak for anyone else of the same "party".
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 03:36:30 AM
 #129

Wrong! They're both violent and coercive, they just want to impose different views. That baloney of "pacific people that's pushed to war" makes no sense at all!

I didn't say anything about pacifists. I think that's suicide. However, there is a difference between aggression and self-defense.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 03:46:44 AM
 #130

It reminds me of when people go to the store to buy something and the price is much higher than they expect but they buy it anyway, and then complain about the transaction.

Well if you didn't think the can of beans was worth $12, then why did you trade for it?

Another example is during the Hurricane Katrina crisis, some guy brought down a truckload of bottled water and was selling it for something like $25 a gallon. There was a line of people buying it and someone in line called the cops. When the cops showed up and forced him to stop selling water, all the people in the line started clapping. That was a real "WTF" moment for humanity. It shows that most people are just plain stupid. If you want the water and are willing to stand in line and pay high prices for it why are you happy to see the supply being cut off?! Didn't you really want that water? If not, why were you paying so much for it? It boggles the mind.

What most people don't understand is that price gouging serves two purposes, one is rationing and the other is increasing the supply. If there is a disaster and you go to the grocery store and the prices are the typical prices for milk, orange juice, flashlight batteries, etc, the first guy in line is going to load up his cart and buy the place out because he knows he might need it. If the price for a gallon of milk is $25 though, he's probably going to buy just one or two and leave some for the rest of the people in line. Also, since the prices go up, all the suppliers start bringing in more supplies to make a profit which helps to satisfy the increased demand. It's like a cry for help that says, "Hey we need milk over here so bad that we are paying $25 a gallon! Send more milk!" If you artificially force the prices to remain low it's limiting how loud you can cry for help.
FatherMcGruder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 04:18:21 AM
 #131

The ultimate question over Anarchy is exactly that... "is doesn't appeal you". No matter what FAQs are or not written they represent the vision of one claimed to be Anarchist without any value whatsoever to the whole "Anarchist community", taken under such seams everyone does as he pleases and everybody pleases differently.
Even a cursory review of that FAQ would reveal to you that a number of anarchists wrote it. They also cited many other anarchists' works and disclaimed against representing all anarchists except for where all anarchists agree: anarchism is a revolt against capitalism and government.

Use my Trade Hill referral code: TH-R11519

Check out bitcoinity.org and Ripple.

Shameless display of my bitcoin address:
1Hio4bqPUZnhr2SWi4WgsnVU1ph3EkusvH
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 04:37:23 AM
 #132

except for where all anarchists agree: anarchism is a revolt against capitalism and government.

You are delusional. You and BCEmporium are lost causes so I won't be engaging in conversation with either of you again. Sorry but I have better things to do, like bashing my head against a wall.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 04:38:31 AM
 #133


You are delusional. You and BCEmporium are lost causes so I won't be engaging in conversation with either of you again. Sorry but I have better things to do, like bashing my head against a wall.

You have a higher tolerance than I.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
FatherMcGruder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 04:47:15 AM
 #134

You are delusional. You and BCEmporium are lost causes so I won't be engaging in conversation with either of you again. Sorry but I have better things to do, like bashing my head against a wall.
Was it something I said?

Use my Trade Hill referral code: TH-R11519

Check out bitcoinity.org and Ripple.

Shameless display of my bitcoin address:
1Hio4bqPUZnhr2SWi4WgsnVU1ph3EkusvH
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 05:02:13 AM
 #135

You are delusional. You and BCEmporium are lost causes so I won't be engaging in conversation with either of you again. Sorry but I have better things to do, like bashing my head against a wall.
Was it something I said?

That goes without saying, unless the two of you share an apartment, and you used his toothbrush.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Gluskab
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 05:15:11 AM
 #136

Why are so many people pro-peaceful interaction and voluntaryism when someone wishes to get married or find friends to hang out with, yet so quick to whip out the implicit violence whenever money enters the picture?

http://www.twitter.com/EverydayAgorism/
Check out my blog on Bitcoin and Agorism! http://www.practicalagorism.com/
BTC : 173nD33C17211xUiViDArdLcriV6NSpaEP
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 05:16:16 AM
 #137

Why are so many people pro-peaceful interaction and voluntaryism when someone wishes to get married or find friends to hang out with, yet so quick to whip out the implicit violence whenever money enters the picture?

Cognitive dissonance.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Gluskab
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 05:18:31 AM
 #138

Why are so many people pro-peaceful interaction and voluntaryism when someone wishes to get married or find friends to hang out with, yet so quick to whip out the implicit violence whenever money enters the picture?

Cognitive dissonance.

I know, just hoping to hear what the fashionable explanation is these days.

http://www.twitter.com/EverydayAgorism/
Check out my blog on Bitcoin and Agorism! http://www.practicalagorism.com/
BTC : 173nD33C17211xUiViDArdLcriV6NSpaEP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 120


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 11:49:51 AM
 #139

Posted in the wrong thread, try again over at http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5643.0

1NNtT9WQZc2EftEQtkQLSN7obzogckEqq5
All the cool kids are leaving a donation address in their sig?
State-less capitalist society = Mafia run society. Capitalist apologists who support such this, are not anarchists.
BCEmporium
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 11:51:33 AM
 #140

Wrong! They're both violent and coercive, they just want to impose different views. That baloney of "pacific people that's pushed to war" makes no sense at all!

I didn't say anything about pacifists. I think that's suicide. However, there is a difference between aggression and self-defense.

What's aggression and what's self defense just depends on which side of the barricade you're.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!