The Role of Government

[The Northumbrian Republic]

Libertarianism is a societal illness.

Good thing I'm an anarchist!

What anarcho?
I'm most likely an anarcho-syndicalist and (actual definition) libertarian.

[Novsvacro]

Exactly, to secure that the needs of all are met.

Which it pretty much never does. It just serves as a body of power-hungry psychopaths. So fuck it.

Fuck the state, not government.

[Genivaria]

Which it pretty much never does. It just serves as a body of power-hungry psychopaths. So fuck it.

Fuck the state, not government.

What about a global state?

[Novsvacro]

Fuck the state, not government.

What about a global state?

It would be the same, global exploitation. We need society to be ran by producers themselves, and to have the means of production and distribution be organized by their respective operators (collective ownership of factories, roads, railroads, etc.).

[Threlizdun]

Fuck the state, not government.

What about a global state?

Even worse than what we already have. The modern state already seems generally incapable of addressing the needs of all their citizens. Decentralization and efforts to concentrate power in the hands of individuals within their community seem more conducive to direct approaches to addressing the problems people face. I don't see how it seems even remotely possible to believe that further centralization in the hands of global state could possibly help matters. People around the world do not face the same challenges. Global cooperation is important, but creating a global state solves nothing. We seek to abolish the state, not expand its power.

[Roelandia]

I see the government essentially as some kind of "referee" who keeps watch on the fair play of the private industry and the populace in general.The government should try to let people live their lives with as much freedom as possible (note: "possible", I'm not saying they should be free to do anything. It all has to be within reason). The government should also look out for it's populace but in a non paternalizing way, the way to do that (in my opinion) is to be reasonable and sensible. By that I mean, not too many taxes, not too little. Not demonizing companies for making money but instead partnering with them to make them provide a service that benefits society and their pockets. Get rid of the divide between the private and the public sector and merge them instead, coordinated (but not actually run) by the government. It's essentially a balancing act.

I try to make my nation in nationstates reflect the above ideal

[Genivaria]

What about a global state?

It would be the same, global exploitation. We need society to be ran by producers themselves, and to have the means of production and distribution be organized by their respective operators (collective ownership of factories, roads, railroads, etc.).

Globalization and workplace democracy are not mutually exclusive.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Good thing I'm an anarchist!

What anarcho?
I'm most likely an anarcho-syndicalist and (actual definition) libertarian.

I simply identify as an anarchist, more specifically an illegalist. I'm economically a mutualist.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Which it pretty much never does. It just serves as a body of power-hungry psychopaths. So fuck it.

Fuck the state, not government.

Fuck both. Anarchy should be everyone ruling themselves. There can be laws, but only to protect the complete freedom of every individual. And they should be enforced by society as a whole.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Fuck the state, not government.

What about a global state?

Terrible idea. Governments tend to work best when they are completely local.

[Conscentia]

Fuck the state, not government.

Fuck both. Anarchy should be everyone ruling themselves. There can be laws, but only to protect the complete freedom of every individual. And they should be enforced by society as a whole.

No thanks. I like the division of labour. I can be a scientist. Some other guys can go be policemen.

[Mysterious Stranger]

So basically you're advocating anarchy. It's been tried, it failed even more massively than leninism.

Evidence? If by Spain in the Civil War, that worked remarkably well. That and the Ukraine Free Territory were destroyed by Leninists intervention (espionage and military force, respectively).

I just want to make sure... you spelled edgy wrong in your sig on purpose, right?

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Fuck both. Anarchy should be everyone ruling themselves. There can be laws, but only to protect the complete freedom of every individual. And they should be enforced by society as a whole.

No thanks. I like the division of labour. I can be a scientist. Some other guys can go be policemen.

There are no police in an anarchist society.

Nor prisons.

[Mysterious Stranger]

Fuck both. Anarchy should be everyone ruling themselves. There can be laws, but only to protect the complete freedom of every individual. And they should be enforced by society as a whole.

No thanks. I like the division of labour. I can be a scientist. Some other guys can go be policemen.

See the issue with that is it tends to lead to rule by policemen.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Voluntary militia.

So basically you're advocating anarchy. It's been tried, it failed even more massively than leninism.

Nope. If it was located around numerous liberal nations, it seems reasonable that an anarchist society could easily exist, without fascists and imperialists surrounding it.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

No thanks. I like the division of labour. I can be a scientist. Some other guys can go be policemen.

See the issue with that is it tends to lead to rule by policemen.

Exactly. Society as a whole enforces the law. No rulers. No one has more authority than another.

[Communist Volkstrad]

The role of government is to make sure its people are well, provided for, able to live their lives free from corruption and the interests of those who would do them harm, to protect the world we live in from excess pollution and destruction, and many other things as well. A government, all in all, should be there for its people, for its land, for the world, and not for corporate gain, not for religious fanatics who would push their views on the rest of us, and not for oppressing its people.

[Conscentia]

No thanks. I like the division of labour. I can be a scientist. Some other guys can go be policemen.

See the issue with that is it tends to lead to rule by policemen.

Rule by policemen has literally never ever been a form of government for any society in the history of humanity.

[Conscentia]

See the issue with that is it tends to lead to rule by policemen.

Exactly. Society as a whole enforces the law. No rulers. No one has more authority than another.

The men with guns, loud voices, charisma, and/or muscles are likely to acquire more authority rather quickly.
You can't abolish authority.

[Communist Volkstrad]

See the issue with that is it tends to lead to rule by policemen.

Exactly. Society as a whole enforces the law. No rulers. No one has more authority than another.

You expect this to work in the modern day? Please. That will never work until at least the far, far future. Humans will never go along with such a thing as its entirety. People will fight to assert their authority, and it will collapse.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Exactly. Society as a whole enforces the law. No rulers. No one has more authority than another.

The men with guns, loud voices, charisma, and/or muscles are likely to acquire authority rather quickly.
You can't abolish authority.

Yes, you can. It's been done. The reason it didn't last is outside forces.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Exactly. Society as a whole enforces the law. No rulers. No one has more authority than another.

You expect this to work in the modern day? Please. That will never work until at least the far, far future. Humans will never go along with such a thing as its entirety. People will fight to assert their authority, and it will collapse.

I never said it could happen today. On a small scale, it is happening today, and could happen even more. But an anarchist world, or continent? No, I'll never see it.

But if we don't start working toward it now, more and more generations will suffer under the state.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

See the issue with that is it tends to lead to rule by policemen.

Rule by policemen has literally never ever been a form of government for any society in the history of humanity.

You think if a society was anarchist except that there were policemen, the policemen, as sole bearers of authority, would not essentially become the rulers?

[Communist Volkstrad]

You expect this to work in the modern day? Please. That will never work until at least the far, far future. Humans will never go along with such a thing as its entirety. People will fight to assert their authority, and it will collapse.

I never said it could happen today. On a small scale, it is happening today, and could happen even more. But an anarchist world, or continent? No, I'll never see it.

But if we don't start working toward it now, more and more generations will suffer under the state.

I don't think so. The objective should be to make the state better, to make it serve its people's interests and watch it carefully to make sure it doesn't break its responsibilities. This would require a lot of transparency, but once that's nailed down things will run smoothly. One needs the State to manage a nation.

[Conscentia]

The men with guns, loud voices, charisma, and/or muscles are likely to acquire authority rather quickly.
You can't abolish authority.

Yes, you can. It's been done. The reason it didn't last is outside forces.

Outside forces - ie. men with guns, loud voices, charisma, and/or muscles.
Anarchists that have actually managed to get some land have always done it by building militias.