Libertarian Discussion Thread II - Don't Thread on Me

[Frievolk]

Except that mutualism, while seemingly more palatable than other forms of "libertarian" socialism, would in effect justify large scale theft of property so long as it is deemed by some entity that that property is not in use and can be reappropriated.

So did Capitalism when it effectively allowed the State to redistribute the properties of the Feudals, but nobody seems to care about that.

[Torrocca]

Except that mutualism, while seemingly more palatable than other forms of "libertarian" socialism, would in effect justify large scale theft of property so long as it is deemed by some entity that that property is not in use and can be reappropriated.

So did Capitalism when it effectively allowed the State to redistribute the properties of the Feudals, but nobody seems to care about that.

Shhh, that doesn't count because those people were doing their oppressive authoritarianism in the wrong way /s

[Petrolheadia]

Except that mutualism, while seemingly more palatable than other forms of "libertarian" socialism, would in effect justify large scale theft of property so long as it is deemed by some entity that that property is not in use and can be reappropriated.

So did Capitalism when it effectively allowed the State to redistribute the properties of the Feudals, but nobody seems to care about that.

Because the capitalist model involved buyouts of the land.

You're talking about the more authoritarain one.

[Frievolk]

So did Capitalism when it effectively allowed the State to redistribute the properties of the Feudals, but nobody seems to care about that.

Because the capitalist model involved buyouts of the land.

You're talking about the more authoritarain one.

Not really. In a lot of societies, the State was eventually forced to do land reforms and shit like that before capitalism could be established. Most of the time, that doesn't include buying the land from a feudal. (Similarly, abolitionism: You don't buy the slaves, you force the slaver to free them.)

[Petrolheadia]

Because the capitalist model involved buyouts of the land.

You're talking about the more authoritarain one.

Not really. In a lot of societies, the State was eventually forced to do land reforms and shit like that before capitalism could be established. Most of the time, that doesn't include buying the land from a feudal. (Similarly, abolitionism: You don't buy the slaves, you force the slaver to free them.)

Sometimes, it does. The first example that springs to my mind is 1920s Poland (as well as similar comcepts arising in the 18th century and Austro-Hungary buying out the distilleries operating just to get the local peasants drunk), with me being Polish.

There was also the shift from peasantry to renting and sharecropping (e.g. US, UK, Prussia).

[Autarkheia]

Honestly tho, Anarchism is just a rational conclusion of the train of thought that started with The Age of Enlightenment: "The State is a Necessary Evil"
A necessary evil is still an evil after all.

Which why I'm a philosophical anarchist. I think it would be awesome if we could get by without a state. The only problem is that it's a big if.

This is why I'm open to compromise with even social democrats and center-left liberals despite my unwavering optimism.

Got to say I like you way better than the edgy "liberals get the bullet too" anarchists I've met online. They're probably just lifestylists.

[Northern Davincia]

Honestly tho, Anarchism is just a rational conclusion of the train of thought that started with The Age of Enlightenment: "The State is a Necessary Evil"
A necessary evil is still an evil after all.

Which why I'm a philosophical anarchist. I think it would be awesome if we could get by without a state. The only problem is that it's a big if.

This is why I'm open to compromise with even social democrats and center-left liberals despite my unwavering optimism.

Got to say I like you way better than the edgy "liberals get the bullet too" anarchists I've met online. They're probably just lifestylists.

I like to imagine that it's possible to live without a state on a large scale. More should be done to promote social experiments to give a definitive answer.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Which why I'm a philosophical anarchist. I think it would be awesome if we could get by without a state. The only problem is that it's a big if.
Got to say I like you way better than the edgy "liberals get the bullet too" anarchists I've met online. They're probably just lifestylists.

I like to imagine that it's possible to live without a state on a large scale. More should be done to promote social experiments to give a definitive answer.

First it should be tried on a small scale. Recreate something like Gault's Gulch Chile, only without a scam artist running it, and see if it works.

[Darussalam]

If medieval Iceland is any indication, a stable equilibrium of stateless society is possible through (1) relative wealth equality and (2) internal racial homogeneity and isolation from the outside world.

I'm not seeing why it would be "ideal" to have stateless societies. Medieval Icelandic society did not push for wealth creation, most of its populace were living on near-subsistence level common in premodern era, and the legal system that evolves in the vacuum of state power generally relies on disproportionate vengeance as an incentive against perceived crime/slight, not really something to be envied.

[Elwher]

Honestly tho, Anarchism is just a rational conclusion of the train of thought that started with The Age of Enlightenment: "The State is a Necessary Evil"
A necessary evil is still an evil after all.

Which why I'm a philosophical anarchist. I think it would be awesome if we could get by without a state. The only problem is that it's a big if.

I have often said that a Libertarian is someone who wishes anarchism would work, but knows it won't; so we settle for the next best thing.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

If medieval Iceland is any indication, a stable equilibrium of stateless society is possible through (1) relative wealth equality and (2) internal racial homogeneity and isolation from the outside world.

I'm not seeing why it would be "ideal" to have stateless societies. Medieval Icelandic society did not push for wealth creation, most of its populace were living on near-subsistence level common in premodern era, and the legal system that evolves in the vacuum of state power generally relies on disproportionate vengeance as an incentive against perceived crime/slight, not really something to be envied.

I agree. While the state should be heavily restricted in scope, abolishing it completely might not be the best idea.

[Northern Davincia]

I like to imagine that it's possible to live without a state on a large scale. More should be done to promote social experiments to give a definitive answer.

First it should be tried on a small scale. Recreate something like Gault's Gulch Chile, only without a scam artist running it, and see if it works.

I'd be in favor of that.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Ok look, I'm as anarchic as the next guy but please don't mistake 19th century Scientific Romanticism with actual science.

b-b-but Mutual Aid is a legitimate scientific outlook on humanity ;~;

Dialectical Materialism Mutual Aid is a SCIENCE!

[Northern Davincia]

b-b-but Mutual Aid is a legitimate scientific outlook on humanity ;~;

Dialectical Materialism Mutual Aid is a SCIENCE!

Mutual aid is like making a society out of dominos.

[Proctopeo]

Dialectical Materialism Mutual Aid is a SCIENCE!

Mutual aid is like making a society out of dominos.

we live in a domino's, pizzas rise up
-papa john or some shit idk

[Page]

I'm not seeing why it would be "ideal" to have stateless societies. Medieval Icelandic society did not push for wealth creation, most of its populace were living on near-subsistence level common in premodern era, and the legal system that evolves in the vacuum of state power generally relies on disproportionate vengeance as an incentive against perceived crime/slight, not really something to be envied.

I think it would be ideal for those who want to form stateless societies to be able to do so, while those who wish to remain under a state can do that too. Worldwide statelessness doesn't have to be achieved (and probably can never be). What is required is that anarchist communities become numerous, self-sufficient, and powerful enough that the state no longer deems it worth it to attempt to subjugate them.

And I think the problem of disproportionate vengeance could be minimized if communities are based on voluntary association and mutual aid. In most personal disputes, the community could serve as mediators. Of course, it may also happen that two people decide to settle their dispute with a duel once in awhile, but even that is not as savage as it seems. One thing a lot of people don't know about duels is that participants would often intentionally miss their shots because they didn't truly desire to kill the other. And in such a situation where each has the chance to kill another but declines to do so, that can lay the dispute to rest.

[Northern Davincia]

Mutual aid is like making a society out of dominos.

we live in a domino's, pizzas rise up
-papa john or some shit idk

Papa John's ain't bad but Pizza Hut is the true ancap fast food brand.

[Torrocca]

Dialectical Materialism Mutual Aid is a SCIENCE!

Mutual aid is like making a society out of dominos.

Mutual aid is more like making society as its foundations again, minus tearing down everything built atop said foundations.

[Petrolheadia]

Mutual aid is like making a society out of dominos.

Mutual aid is more like making society as its foundations again, minus tearing down everything built atop said foundations.

That's like trying to replace the frame while driving.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Mutual aid is like making a society out of dominos.

Mutual aid is more like making society as its foundations again, minus tearing down everything built atop said foundations.

Replacing the foundations, without replacing everything built on those foundations?

[Torrocca]

Mutual aid is more like making society as its foundations again, minus tearing down everything built atop said foundations.

Replacing the foundations, without replacing everything built on those foundations?

Recreating the foundations atop themselves and all that's built upon them.

Or, y'know, adding a roof to a roofless building or whathaveyou.

[Torrocca]

Mutual aid is more like making society as its foundations again, minus tearing down everything built atop said foundations.

That's like trying to replace the frame while driving.

It's more like taking a pitstop amid a race while your car is rusted, scratched, dented, and missing two tires and getting everything fixed.

[Petrolheadia]

That's like trying to replace the frame while driving.

It's more like taking a pitstop amid a race while your car is rusted, scratched, dented, and missing two tires and getting everything fixed.

Which is an awful idea if you're in a race.

[Torrocca]

It's more like taking a pitstop amid a race while your car is rusted, scratched, dented, and missing two tires and getting everything fixed.

Which is an awful idea if you're in a race.

Not if everyone else's car is in a similar condition.

[Petrolheadia]

Which is an awful idea if you're in a race.

Not if everyone else's car is in a similar condition.

Ever seen a car restoration's length?