Nick900 Posted November 29, 2015 Posted November 29, 2015 So once the government has hung up its hat and rod and we are living in an anarchist society, how do you prevent the second coming? It may not happen for a while but 7 generations later when people have forgotten about the problems of the state, how do you prevent them from getting it going again? (I'm assuming some sort of snow ball effect with more and more people signing on) Alternatively what's to stop some massive group like a religion from taking over? It may not be logical to take over, it may not be financially viable to do so, but hey ... Religion might do it anyway?
dsayers Posted November 29, 2015 Posted November 29, 2015 Alternatively what's to stop some massive group like a religion from taking over? Well, what's to stop YOU from taking over. Everybody else. What's to stop you and your best from taking over. Everybody else minus that one extra person. And so on. Until a group literally has 51% of the world's population behind it, it has to push against greater counter force. The only reason the US for example is able to dominate to the degree that it does is due to its perceived legitimacy. Which leads to your titular question... So once the government has hung up its hat and rod and we are living in an anarchist society, how do you prevent the second coming? To understand the answer to this, you first have to understand how that scenario could come to be. It's going to take rational thought, acceptance of property rights, and a nurturing upbringing where win-win negotiation is modeled. All of this not only shatters the veil of legitimacy that institutionalized coercion (government) operates behind, but empowers the individual with the desire to not accept that subjugation. See, those things aren't just a cure, they're an inoculation. On a personal side note, you had created a couple threads recently asking questions. You didn't really contribute to them any further, accept to acknowledge the responses to one. Instead of using us for sanctuary, why not come in and take your hat off? Stay awhile? If we got to know you and your background, it might help us to communicate about these ideas better for you
wdiaz03 Posted November 29, 2015 Posted November 29, 2015 So once the government has hung up its hat and rod and we are living in an anarchist society, how do you prevent the second coming? It may not happen for a while but 7 generations later when people have forgotten about the problems of the state, how do you prevent them from getting it going again? (I'm assuming some sort of snow ball effect with more and more people signing on) Alternatively what's to stop some massive group like a religion from taking over? It may not be logical to take over, it may not be financially viable to do so, but hey ... Religion might do it anyway? Nice chatting with you earlier Phil. To reiterate my point. "memes" that's the ticket. If you imagine an anarchist society comprise of the people of today, one will have a hard time imagining it working. People of today don't have the right memes. Just like 500 years ago most people didn't have the right memes to oppose slavery. to illustrate my point imagine generations of people being raised with peaceful parenting. asking "What is stopping them from starting to hit their children?" To those people the idea of hitting their children would be incomprehensible. Just like the idea of kidnapping someone and making them your slave would be to you today (hopefully) I believe we as humans are not even close to ready yet, it will take generations for the right memes to spread enough to make a difference. I hope that helps. Would love to hear what you think or of you have any counterpoints.
Will Torbald Posted November 29, 2015 Posted November 29, 2015 The same way you prevent the re-rise of monarchy, slavery, cannibalism, human sacrifice, and so on. The world has moved on from their primitive roots and it will continue to evolve.
J. D. Stembal Posted November 30, 2015 Posted November 30, 2015 So once the government has hung up its hat and rod and we are living in an anarchist society, how do you prevent the second coming? It may not happen for a while but 7 generations later when people have forgotten about the problems of the state, how do you prevent them from getting it going again? (I'm assuming some sort of snow ball effect with more and more people signing on) Alternatively what's to stop some massive group like a religion from taking over? It may not be logical to take over, it may not be financially viable to do so, but hey ... Religion might do it anyway? The State and religion are bedfellows. Get rid of one and the other shall also perish.
dsayers Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 The State and religion are bedfellows. Get rid of one and the other shall also perish. Sadly, addressing the symptoms doesn't lead to this end. The problem is that people were abused as children and groomed for servitude and external validation. So traditionally, those who find the State or other religions to be problematic will just seek out another form of being controlled or externally validated. It's only when the problem is addressed (abuse, irrationality, etc) that a person is able to see that BOTH (and everything like it) are a waste of time.
ResidingOnEarth Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 I believe we as humans are not even close to ready yet I'm ready!! (I acknowledge that many other humans are not) 1
AncapFTW Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 Most people are stuck in a Master/slave dichotomy, where they think that it is only normal to rule or be ruled. Until they break out of it society will be stuck with a State. Once most people are out of it, the Master/slave dichotomy will seem antiquated at best.
ResidingOnEarth Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 Most people are stuck in a Master/slave dichotomy, where they think that it is only normal to rule or be ruled. Until they break out of it society will be stuck with a State. Once most people are out of it, the Master/slave dichotomy will seem antiquated at best. The strange thing is: they are willing slaves. Even though they don't choose the rules that are imposed on them or the amount of their produce that is taken from them, they do choose to support their master. Those of us who throw off our mental chains and decide that we do not want nor need a master immediately transition from being willing slaves to being unwilling victims. I do sometimes wonder if these willing slaves have a genetic predisposition to their predilection for the slave role. I find it very natural to be my own master and do not feel the need for anyone else to take that role. Most people I speak to hold desperately onto their slave mentality. Before I found philosophy I always had the sense something was wrong. I just didn't understand what it was. It almost feels like I gravitated to the state I am in now. I am my own government. I govern myself and have no desire to govern others. Why don't other people feel that how things are, "are wrong" like I felt? Why don't they desperately seek out truth and freedom like I did and still do?
dsayers Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 Obviously willing slave is a contradiction in terms. One of the reasons why I liked Stef's "gun in the room approach" is because it addressed the actual problem. It's not that the slaves accept their station, it's that they don't understand that it's slavery. They think taxation is akin to paying for your order at a restaurant. They don't see the gun in the room.
ResidingOnEarth Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 Obviously willing slave is a contradiction in terms. One of the reasons why I liked Stef's "gun in the room approach" is because it addressed the actual problem. It's not that the slaves accept their station, it's that they don't understand that it's slavery. They think taxation is akin to paying for your order at a restaurant. They don't see the gun in the room. Is it a contradiction? I just looked up the word "slave" and the definitions I found all seem to fit my prior understanding of its meaning. "One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household." "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence" "A person who is the property of another person and whose labor and also whose life often is subject to the owner's volition." https://www.wordnik.com/words/slave I don't think being a slave has to be forced upon someone. I think people can choose to be slaves. I see no reason why a person cannot voluntarily submit themselves to the will of a master they have chosen. Obviously once they have picked a master, then they are acting based on the will of their master; not their own will. But they still wilfully chose to be a slave. Also: I think all slaves still have their own will and there will always be some facets of their life where they can exercise that will freely. For instance: a master may not care when a slave drinks or does not drink. So the slave could decide when they drink. So I think it's possible to willfully become a slave and once you are a slave to still have some ability to freely exercise your will. A statist is a willing slave. If you support government, you support the idea of having a master that decides some things for you. Edit: I will correct myself: some statists are willing slaves. I agree that some people simply don't understand that it's slavery. They have been subjected to government propaganda and don't know any better. I think though, that once you have made the simple "gun in the room" argument to them and they continue to support and justify their master, then they are truly willing slaves. This has made me think of the Jones Plantation by Larken Rose:
Recommended Posts