Anarchists Explain Yourselves!

[Nierra]

Human population growth over all of human history looks like this:

http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hir ... opulat.gif[/spoiler

Wars over the time period of Human History are now in massive decline - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbuUW9i-mHs

These are around 27 reasons as to why society has made significant progress over the years.
http://www.vox.com/2014/11/24/7272929/charts-thankful


The inherent nature of these things are all linked to the state. It's linked with advancements in our legal system, it's linked with advancements in trade, and it's linked with advancements in technology and medicine. You might believe yourselves in stating that these ventures and triumphs of humanity are inherently achieved in spite of the state, but this is simply untrue.

The fact is that the internet would not have been founded if it wasn't for the Government. The very first network was something called ARPNET which would soon become the first network to use internet protocol. This was Government funded, and in many ways a Government linked expenditure. The interstate highway systems that are the backbone of trade and commerce. The market revolution, often identified of capitalisms greatest triumph without the Government protecting the interests of corporations heroic individualists wouldn't be able to succeed. In fact the very existence of a corporation can be linked to the Government. Social Security, would not be a thing. Retirements would be insecure and without obamacare a trip to the emergency room could mean the end of your financial independence.

Government has failed before, and it will fail again. Sometimes it's messy and bureaucratic instead of efficient and lean. This makes it easy to scold Government and blame it for being the source of most of our problems, but without the state protecting our freedoms and our opportunity we would never be able to build much of what we call the fundamentals of our economy or the basis of American Capitalism.

The inherent principles of economic systems is not only aided by a state, but requires the state to establish a dry ground of economic fundamentals and insure it to fertilize the soil to pave the way for economic growth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNftCCwAol0

The question - Anarchism resides in a radically different way of thinking and form of governing than the State or Mixed Market Economies. If things are getting so much better than, well any period in human history, why would we want to flip everything on its head? Government has made mistakes, but the net positive has grown.

How would anarchism in any form sustain a city, let alone a global market place?

It is also ridiculous to state that the State plays no rule in this. The reasoning? States are Big, and virtually anything they do will have an effect on everything in some way, shape, or form.

As for anachro-capitalists so obsessed with consumer choice and self regulation, who is to say that the current model of Government isn't the one consumers are choosing?

[Conglomerate of Iron]

Human population growth over all of human history looks like this:

http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hires/worldpopulat.gif

Wars over the time period of Human History are now in massive decline - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbuUW9i-mHs

Crimes throughout Human History look like this:

http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/best_year_graphics-05.png

Democracy is on the rise, and poverty is on the decline.

Why? Medicine + knowledge + Governments + Mixed Market Capitalism = prosperity

The question - Anarchism resides in a radically different way of thinking and form of governing than the State or Mixed Market Economies. If things are getting so much better than, well any period in human history, why would we want to flip everything on its head?

I would argue industrialization and technology, fueling good surpluses, in addition to the preventative effects of firearms (enabling anyone to defend themselves) contributes to this peace and population growth.

Governments cause war, so getting rid of government means less war.

And humans are evolving. Soon we will be good enough to not need government.

You falsely attribute these things to government when government creates most problems in the world.

[Nierra]

Human population growth over all of human history looks like this:

http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hires/worldpopulat.gif

Wars over the time period of Human History are now in massive decline - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbuUW9i-mHs

Crimes throughout Human History look like this:

http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/best_year_graphics-05.png

Democracy is on the rise, and poverty is on the decline.

Why? Medicine + knowledge + Governments + Mixed Market Capitalism = prosperity

The question - Anarchism resides in a radically different way of thinking and form of governing than the State or Mixed Market Economies. If things are getting so much better than, well any period in human history, why would we want to flip everything on its head?

I would argue industrialization and technology, fueling good surpluses, in addition to the preventative effects of firearms (enabling anyone to defend themselves) contributes to this peace and population growth.

Governments cause war, so getting rid of government means less war.

And humans are evolving. Soon we will be good enough to not need government.

You falsely attribute these things to government when government creates most problems in the world.

Or, you know medicine and doctors? As well as hospitals facilitated by the state? I disagree with anachro-capitalism entirely it literally has no merits whatsoever but I don't want this to be a thread jack about that. I'm referencing all forms of anarchism so I'll contest the ancaps in a different thread.

Government's are not the cause of war, society is. In all of it's forms, in all of human history. Actually, I would make the argument that Governments are the solution to war in the long run. If it wasn't for Governments we would never have the widespread of democracy and free trade which prevents the vast majority of war in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NIgqS47m5k

Murder rates are going done because it simply isn't necessary and there aren't enough genuine motives to kill anyone it simply makes everyone worse off.To argue it's all because of guns is the most ridiculous generalization that cannot be blatantly presumed to be true without statistical evidence to back this up as a trend throughout human history that is linked to crime.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is one of the most fundamental principles of statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

[Nazi Flower Power]

And humans are evolving. Soon we will be good enough to not need government.

I see no evidence of this. Humans are doing a better job of living together in peace because we've developed better systems to organize people and settle conflicts, but the government is part of that. I see no evidence that people are becoming better by nature or that we are getting close to a system that can keep the peace without a government.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

I would argue industrialization and technology, fueling good surpluses, in addition to the preventative effects of firearms (enabling anyone to defend themselves) contributes to this peace and population growth.

Governments cause war, so getting rid of government means less war.

And humans are evolving. Soon we will be good enough to not need government.

You falsely attribute these things to government when government creates most problems in the world.

Or, you know medicine and doctors? As well as hospitals facilitated by the state? I disagree with anachro-capitalism entirely it literally has no merits whatsoever but I don't want this to be a thread jack about that. I'm referencing all forms of anarchism so I'll contest the ancaps in a different thread.

Government's are not the cause of war, society is. In all of it's forms, in all of human history. Actually, I would make the argument that Governments are the solution to war in the long run. If it wasn't for Governments we would never have the widespread of democracy and free trade which prevents the vast majority of war in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NIgqS47m5k

Murder rates are going done because it simply isn't necessary and there aren't enough genuine motives to kill anyone it simply makes everyone worse off.To argue it's all because of guns is the most ridiculous generalization that cannot be blatantly presumed to be true without statistical evidence to back this up as a trend throughout human history that is linked to crime.

I could argue back and forth, but I have given up arguing with people online a long time ago.

I just encourage you to look at it from my point of view: I just want to be free. Why should you and your people tell me how to live my life? And of course steal from me and kill me if I don't pay said extortion money.

Read Rothbard/Hoppe/Konkin. You would understand better.

BTW: correlation does not equal causation. Keep that in mind.

Have a pleasant day. Maybe one day you will see threatening to kidnap me/kill me if I don't follow your arbitrary rules and forcing me to pay money to your god (government) is a bad thing, and that all people should be free.

But whatever, Have fun.

[Natapoc]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is literally one of the most fundamental principles if statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

Unfortunately this is one of NSGs favorite fallacies to ignore. They won't let go of it easily. Good luck!

[Nierra]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is literally one of the most fundamental principles if statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

If you looked at the sources it is thoroughly argued that this is all because of the evolution of the state, and even though all of it is based on the a logical fallacy that does not mean that it is not true.

[Nierra]

Or, you know medicine and doctors? As well as hospitals facilitated by the state? I disagree with anachro-capitalism entirely it literally has no merits whatsoever but I don't want this to be a thread jack about that. I'm referencing all forms of anarchism so I'll contest the ancaps in a different thread.

Government's are not the cause of war, society is. In all of it's forms, in all of human history. Actually, I would make the argument that Governments are the solution to war in the long run. If it wasn't for Governments we would never have the widespread of democracy and free trade which prevents the vast majority of war in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NIgqS47m5k

Murder rates are going done because it simply isn't necessary and there aren't enough genuine motives to kill anyone it simply makes everyone worse off.To argue it's all because of guns is the most ridiculous generalization that cannot be blatantly presumed to be true without statistical evidence to back this up as a trend throughout human history that is linked to crime.

I could argue back and forth, but I have given up arguing with people online a long time ago.

I just encourage you to look at it from my point of view: I just want to be free. Why should you and your people tell me how to live my life? And of course steal from me and kill me if I don't pay said extortion money.

Read Rothbard/Hoppe/Konkin. You would understand better.

BTW: correlation does not equal causation. Keep that in mind.

Have a pleasant day. Maybe one day you will see threatening to kidnap me/kill me if I don't follow your arbitrary rules and forcing me to pay money to your god (government) is a bad thing, and that all people should be free.

But whatever, Have fun.

Except the US and most other states don't tell you how to live your life, and failing to pay taxes does not result in death it results in bankruptcy. You are free, quite free in fact. More free than you would be in a ancap society.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

If you looked at the sources it is thoroughly argued that this is all because of the evolution of the state,

I'm not doing your arguing for you. Want to make a claim? Give specifics. Until then you're just making yourself look foolish.

and even though all of it is based on the a logical fallacy that does not mean that it is not true.

... Yes, yes it does. That's the whole reason why it's a fallacy in the first place. Because it is fundamentally wrong.

[Nierra]

If you looked at the sources it is thoroughly argued that this is all because of the evolution of the state,

I'm not doing your arguing for you. Want to make a claim? Give specifics. Until then you're just making yourself look foolish.

and even though all of it is based on the a logical fallacy that does not mean that it is not true.

... Yes, yes it does. That's the whole reason why it's a fallacy in the first place. Because it is fundamentally wrong.

No. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

The sources illustrate the points I made about the state being a reason for that.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

I could argue back and forth, but I have given up arguing with people online a long time ago.

I just encourage you to look at it from my point of view: I just want to be free. Why should you and your people tell me how to live my life? And of course steal from me and kill me if I don't pay said extortion money.

Read Rothbard/Hoppe/Konkin. You would understand better.

BTW: correlation does not equal causation. Keep that in mind.

Have a pleasant day. Maybe one day you will see threatening to kidnap me/kill me if I don't follow your arbitrary rules and forcing me to pay money to your god (government) is a bad thing, and that all people should be free.

But whatever, Have fun.

Except the US and most other states don't tell you how to live your life, and failing to pay taxes does not result in death it results in bankruptcy. You are free, quite free in fact. More free than you would be in a ancap society.

I swore I wasn't going to argue, but I have to argue this.

I cannot do certain drugs, while others are sponsored by the state, I cannot run my business as I would wish. I need permission to build things on MY property. I cannot sell my body for sex, nor can I buy someone else's time. There is a multitude of things the state gets involved in that they have no business getting involved in.

Meanwhile, taxes do result in death if I resist. Lets say I refuse to pay taxes. They come to arrest me. I say I do not want to be kidnapped. They threaten to use violence. I respond in kind. Now we are killing each other. All because I refused to pay extortion money. SEE ERIC GARNER IN NEW YORK!

Lol, whatever. Live in your fantasy world. I wish I could be as high as you.

[Xanama]

Anarchy, everyone is free basically....
GOOD DAY

[Nazi Flower Power]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is literally one of the most fundamental principles if statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

If you looked at the sources it is thoroughly argued that this is all because of the evolution of the state, and even though all of it is based on the a logical fallacy that does not mean that it is not true.

I think the state does play a role in keeping the peace, but rather than tell people to accept something that is "based on a logical fallacy" you might do better to look for a non-fallacious way to support your position. For example, you could explain possible ways that the evolution of the state is connected with the decline in violence. The state coordinates resources to investigate crimes and get violent people off the street. An individual that tries to track down a murderer on their own is not going to have the same resources and skill set that a state-run police department has. That makes it both more dangerous for them to take on the murderer and more difficult for them to be sure they have the right person.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

I'm not doing your arguing for you. Want to make a claim? Give specifics. Until then you're just making yourself look foolish.



... Yes, yes it does. That's the whole reason why it's a fallacy in the first place. Because it is fundamentally wrong.

No. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Your argument is wrong because it is nothing but fallacy. You've posted two phenomena on each axis of a graph, looked at the correlation between the two and stated 'Look, these two variables must have a causative relationship!'. It doesn't matter how well you argue about the bumps in the graph, since the graph is wrong right down to its core.

[Nierra]

Except the US and most other states don't tell you how to live your life, and failing to pay taxes does not result in death it results in bankruptcy. You are free, quite free in fact. More free than you would be in a ancap society.

I swore I wasn't going to argue, but I have to argue this.

I cannot do certain drugs, while others are sponsored by the state, I cannot run my business as I would wish. I need permission to build things on MY property. I cannot sell my body for sex, nor can I buy someone else's time. There is a multitude of things the state gets involved in that they have no business getting involved in.

Meanwhile, taxes do result in death if I resist. Lets say I refuse to pay taxes. They come to arrest me. I say I do not want to be kidnapped. They threaten to use violence. I respond in kind. Now we are killing each other. All because I refused to pay extortion money. SEE ERIC GARNER IN NEW YORK!

Lol, whatever. Live in your fantasy world. I wish I could be as high as you.

You're confusing one individual case with what happens normally. You're also creating a fictitious example made with wording that suits an incredibly nonsensical and backwards ideology that claims the most ridiculous things.

Certain drugs have been deemed to be a danger to society at large, for the most part you can run your business as you wish. You can build a very large catalouge of things on your property but not if it violates the rights of your neighbors.

Regardless much of what you criticize can be corrected by reform, and the good that Government does far outweighs the negatives it does but again your ideology cannot actually function in any world.

[Nierra]

No. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Your argument is wrong because it is nothing but fallacy. You've posted two phenomena on each axis of a graph, looked at the correlation between the two and stated 'Look, these two variables must have a causative relationship!'. It doesn't matter how well you argue about the bumps in the graph, since the graph is wrong right down to its core.

Is the graph wrong right down to it's core? It's not, but the state can be pointed to for virtually all the positive outcomes we've ever achieved in society.

[Pandeeria]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is one of the most fundamental principles of statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

Bull fucking shit. Mass industrialization and rapid advances in healthcare due to the aid of a liberal state and a growing economy is what contributed to the great growth in human development.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

Is the graph wrong right down to it's core? It's not,

It is. It's just as meaningless as this one;



Unless you're willing to take up the argument that not importing enough Mexican lemons causes road fatalities, of course.

but the state can be pointed to for virtually all the positive outcomes we've ever achieved in society.

And that's confirmation bias right there.

[Pandeeria]

If you looked at the sources it is thoroughly argued that this is all because of the evolution of the state, and even though all of it is based on the a logical fallacy that does not mean that it is not true.

I think the state does play a role in keeping the peace, but rather than tell people to accept something that is "based on a logical fallacy" you might do better to look for a non-fallacious way to support your position. For example, you could explain possible ways that the evolution of the state is connected with the decline in violence. The state coordinates resources to investigate crimes and get violent people off the street. An individual that tries to track down a murderer on their own is not going to have the same resources and skill set that a state-run police department has. That makes it both more dangerous for them to take on the murderer and more difficult for them to be sure they have the right person.

Which the user is already doing.

To seriously believe the invention of the state, a body that helps centralize economic assets (normally with the aid of private entities) to foster the well being of it's people and to promote scientific and technological literacy throughout the ages, wasn't a major factor for our living standards is absurd. We as biological humans appeared sometimes around 100 to 400 thousand years ago and in the last roughly 3 thousand he had more growth, development, and advances then the rest of our time. Roughly 3 thousand years ago is also when the idea of a centralized body known as a nation (IE a state) formed.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is one of the most fundamental principles of statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

Bull fucking shit. Mass industrialization and rapid advances in healthcare due to the aid of a liberal state and a growing economy is what contributed to the great growth in human development.

Prove the causative relationship. Show me the mechanism.

[Pandeeria]

Is the graph wrong right down to it's core? It's not,

It is. It's just as meaningless as this one;



Unless you're willing to take up the argument that not importing enough Mexican lemons causes road fatalities, of course.

but the state can be pointed to for virtually all the positive outcomes we've ever achieved in society.

And that's confirmation bias right there.

Except it's pretty obvious the state generally has improved it's peoples' lives, at least if you have a basic grasp on history.

[Pandeeria]

Bull fucking shit. Mass industrialization and rapid advances in healthcare due to the aid of a liberal state and a growing economy is what contributed to the great growth in human development.

Prove the causative relationship. Show me the mechanism.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=24505890#p24505890

[Nazi Flower Power]

Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables co-occur with one another does not mean that one causes the other. This is one of the most fundamental principles of statistical analysis. Your entire argument is predicated on a fallacy.

Bull fucking shit. Mass industrialization and rapid advances in healthcare due to the aid of a liberal state and a growing economy is what contributed to the great growth in human development.

Yeah, Nierra's just not doing a good job of explaining that. He actually started with a decent point, but then just let argument go all to hell.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

I swore I wasn't going to argue, but I have to argue this.

I cannot do certain drugs, while others are sponsored by the state, I cannot run my business as I would wish. I need permission to build things on MY property. I cannot sell my body for sex, nor can I buy someone else's time. There is a multitude of things the state gets involved in that they have no business getting involved in.

Meanwhile, taxes do result in death if I resist. Lets say I refuse to pay taxes. They come to arrest me. I say I do not want to be kidnapped. They threaten to use violence. I respond in kind. Now we are killing each other. All because I refused to pay extortion money. SEE ERIC GARNER IN NEW YORK!

Lol, whatever. Live in your fantasy world. I wish I could be as high as you.

You're confusing one individual case with what happens normally. You're also creating a fictitious example made with wording that suits an incredibly nonsensical and backwards ideology that claims the most ridiculous things.

Certain drugs have been deemed to be a danger to society at large, for the most part you can run your business as you wish. You can build a very large catalouge of things on your property but not if it violates the rights of your neighbors.

Regardless much of what you criticize can be corrected by reform, and the good that Government does far outweighs the negatives it does but again your ideology cannot actually function in any world.

What? Whatever. I wish I could debate you in real life, then maybe I would understand your bootlicking attitude. But whatever, I don't have time for this.

Goodbye. Maybe you will realize some people just want to be left alone.