These are questions that come to mind while reading the comments made by "sofa". I've already said if he can come up with a plan-- which doesn't include archation-- which would make him (and others who share his concerns) feel better about moving beyond the government era, I would help promote it. But I need to understand some things more completely.
What do you mean when you speak of cartels? If you're speaking of "drug cartels" why not promote the only tactic that can defeat them now: the complete end of prohibition?
Why do you believe they would be worse than the current government cartels?
How large do you expect them to be?
What do you expect them to do?
What would be their reason for attacking a universally-armed society and what would they want to accomplish by doing so? What would they expect to gain?
How would they "win" without a bureaucratic/political infrastructure ("government") to take over and control? Without anyone "authorized" to surrender on everyone's behalf?
Do you believe there are people who like the military way of life enough that they would organize similarly in a free society? They would be free to do so, without asking permission of a government, in such a situation.
Do you think they'd end up with the abandoned military tools after the government era ends?
Do you believe "lone wolves" who have no use for joining a group would be thrilled to act as snipers and assassins against invaders/cartels?
Would you, personally, fight back-- overtly or covertly-- against cartel thugs going through your neighborhood. Or would you at least assist the resistance?
Do you think the new cartel would be viewed as "legitimate" as is the current government cartel so that few would risk fighting back due to social consequences?
-
Writing to promote liberty is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable enough to support. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.
Writing to promote liberty is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable enough to support. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.
Let's hope sofa responds and doesn't couch his/her replies.
ReplyDeleteI believe he'll respond.
Deletestates are cartels.
ReplyDeletechina is a cartel. Why would they attack/dominate others? because they are thugs.
ms13 is a cartel. they pay govt functionaries and enforcers well. they can overwhelm any small town or county.
something is needed to defend 'rational societies' against threats of that size and depth and professionalism.
any organization that is effective enough to help, is also dangerous enough to enslave the host.
cia, nsa, fbi- are a cartel.
Pointing out the obvious problem with "individual volunteerism", does not mean there is an obvious solution; does not mean i am proposing a solution. It's just pointing out the obvious problem being ignored.
Acknowledging there is a problem- is the first step to working out solutions.
So, a cartel would be any group which uses archation (theft and aggression) and a prohibition of competition (gun bans, "officer safety", etc.) to aggressively rule a population?
Deleteyeah. typical cartel behavior.
Deletesofa king tired of dysfunctional "non-voluntary" society (because there are no online discussion groups for meaningful discussions beyond individuals)
ReplyDeleteThe Free State Project and Free State Wyoming groups used to fill that gap.
Deletere: "Would you, personally, fight back-- overtly or covertly-- against cartel thugs going through your neighborhood. Or would you at least assist the resistance?"
ReplyDeleteobserving current events- it is clear that there is no resistance.
there are individuals. against the blunt and violent organs of state, it may be samizdat for a few generations until the vast wealth of the country is extracted and the socialists run out of other peoples money.
https://atbashian.com/hotel-ussr/
https://atbashian.com/about-oleg/
resistance would start with a unifying theme of core beliefs for the group.
maybe something like oleg's summary:
"individual freedoms, free market capitalism, and international peace based on free trade"
for - individuals - between individuals,within groups - between groups
people under 40 would start rallying around the message.
it might look like poland, where a society schooled in hardcore marxism had to re-train itself
retrain and then rebuild the economic and political infrastructure, and the men to grow within it.
Deleteduring which time, graft and corruption will be re-asserting themselves, trying to eat the "seed corn" and re-infect the system.
so legions of honest moral men in thousands of situations have to ruthlessly protect that common vision for society, or society gets consumed by the roaches again.
where is the modern "declaration"? marxist education never taught folks under 40 the foundational ideas of western civ.
re: "What would be their reason for attacking a universally-armed society and what would they want to accomplish by doing so?"
Deletethe marxists attacked western civilization (including the well armed usa) using marxism. it worked. they now control the economics and the deep state and the schools. An armed society gave up it's children to the insanity of marxism.
why did marxists insert themselves into the richest civilization in the world?
why do leeches infest a host?
why do cartels exist?
organized slavery - to extract from others what they themselves are unwilling or incapable of: they extract vigor and productivity and riches.
what do they hope to accomplish?
The slavery and wealth extraction that THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED.
"there is no resistance"
DeleteBecause there isn't a free society to defend. Why be a martyr for nothing?
If the parasite kills the host there was no point. Marxism is irrational and dumb and self-destructive. So is democracy/political government-- that's why Marxism was able to sneak in so easily. It looked just like patriotism (because it was the same). That's why it's important to speak the truth without compromise trying to get enough people to stand up against such things. You've got to make them see the problem before they'll fight (or otherwise solve) it.
hoping to share the vision of a rational society
Delete(rather than just lone individuals)
re: "Do you think the new cartel would be viewed as "legitimate" as is the current government cartel so that few would risk fighting back due to social consequences?"
ReplyDeletePoland and Hungary are embracing the western ideas which america has abandoned.
the government is getting out of the way of the people, imprisoning folks for corruption, while building a "resilient porcupine" military for defense.
It's the only way to be viewed as legitimate, imho.
... discussions are a lot easier over a beer ...
ReplyDelete"You've got to be very careful if you don't know where you are going, because you might not get there."
ReplyDelete-Yogi Berra
individual liberty only flourishes in an environment that allows it.
ReplyDeletethat's why the one level- individual - philosophy is not enough.
"Had the Japanese got as far as India, Gandhi's theories of "passive resistance" would have floated down the Ganges River with his bayoneted, beheaded carcass."
- Mike Vanderboegh
a minimum set of ingredients for "liberty pizza":
"individual freedoms, free market capitalism, and international peace based on free trade"
individuals + between individuals,within groups + between groups
pizzas can be messy, look different, and have different local flavors and accents.
but it's not a workable pizza unless it has the "minimum set" of ingredients.
tomato sauce is not a pizza. and individual volunteerism is not liberty.
liberty requires social group behavioral norms, functional markets based on volunteerism, and an environment free from physical slavery. we need the whole pizza, not just an individual ingredient.
Thanks for the response.
DeleteI agree that pacifism isn't the way, and I've never advocated it. I do believe there are ways to defend a society-- with violence-- without becoming what you fight, though.
If you figure out how to scale liberty up to larger groups in a way that satisfies you, let me know.
"individual freedoms, free market capitalism, and international peace based on free trade"
Deletecore principles for: individuals + between individuals,within groups + between groups
volunteerism principles "scaled up" beyond individuals, growing out of individual principles, yet describing much more than just individuals.
a minimum set of ingredients for a rational society.
/// thanks again for a good discussion of similar/related concepts; but that contain kernels of evil that contaminate the whole cake. i think we agree on volunteerism for individuals. But presuming that, I yearn for a whole society within which internal and external interactions are also rational. ///
Deletedo you think those core principles are sufficient for a rational society?
what is missing, or incorrect, or self-contradictory?
free individuals + free markets + free trade
DeleteTo me, those core principles seem necessary, and quite possibly sufficient. It takes me a long time to ponder things to make sure I'm not overlooking anything-- I thought about the Zero Aggression Principle long and hard before starting to say it was essential, but not sufficient (that's what led me to come up with the word "archation").
DeleteI guess my only quibble would be that I would use the words "individual liberty" rather than "individual freedom", for reasons I've detailed in the past-- and I think free market capitalism and international peace based on free trade are logical outcomes of individual liberty-- but either way, they certainly don't contradict it.
And, I believe that's what I've advocated all along-- although I admit I focus more on individuals because that's what I experience.