IntenseDebate - Liquid

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 0 replies · +1 points

Thanks for responding...I could continue, but this discussion's been pretty lengthy as is (at least for me).

It seems like a lot boils down to how strongly we weight nature vs. nurture.

And apologies; I did not mean to lump all anarchists as ignoring the issues of crime and the like. That was based on personal experience. I was pretty sure you'd already considered it!

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 2 replies · +1 points

Switch that. :D I'm the one who said that people will not (always) behave in their self-interest. It was a tangentially related to...something. There's already enough to chew on without delving deeper into this.

But I will ask you this: from what I've seen, the Anarchy movement seems to gloss over dealing with irrational people (those who do not behave in their own self-interest). You know, thieves, murderers, those who try to gain power, people who listen to Hanson, etc. It a nutshell, what do you think would be the best way to deal with such people?

(Boy, I hope there are no Hanson fans reading this.)

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 1 reply · +1 points

Even in small gatherings, a charismatic, aggressive person can dominate and marginalize the others. A boring, soft-spoken person with good ideas could be ignored because people aren't really listening.

Of course, this is not something that can really be resolved by form of government...it's just how people are.

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 1 reply · +1 points

This is an assumption. Even in small gatherings, a charismatic, aggressive person can dominate and marginalize the others.

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 1 reply · +1 points

Could you explain more clearly what about the mandated representative? Who does the mandating? At first I assumed it was by vote, but voting and mandating are usually used in contrast to each other.

Your proposed system is still a tiered structure where people have different levels of influence based on which councils they are on. I don't see how this doesn't fit the definition of a hierarchy.

What you describe is a hierarchy that behaves differently and is more accountable to the people. (And boy, wouldn't that be nice.)

Your idea of people being "in power" temporarily is a necessity to prevent individuals from being entrenched in the hierarchy. But many states do this as well.

The United States, in theory, should operate similarly to how you've described. But the US has failed many of its people. There are many factors as to why the implementation does not match the theory. Yes, I believe human nature is one of them (or, better, the nature of some humans). Anarchists seem to underestimate this aspect.

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 12 replies · +1 points

1. Regarding a hierarchy: Let's take this theoretical 7 million person commune. All the people have equal standing and can be involved with the decisions, but this does not mean there will not be a need for organizers to assist in implementing decisions.

At least, there will be two groups of people: "organizers" and "non-organizers". And it's not a very far step (if it's one at all) for them to be considered "leaders" and "non-leaders". Despite the theoretical equality of the groups, we already see a basic hierarchy: people with more influence than others over how decisions how implemented.

2. Regarding the "heard equally" part: I phrased the idea poorly, and it was not well-thought out. The idea was that there needs to be an assurance that a voice can be heard if needs to be. But this can be a problem in any large grouping of people.

3. As far as people not behaving in their self-interest? Happens all the time. A better way to think of it would be "Will enough rational people get involved to overpower the irrational?" Clearly you think so. I am simply uncertain.

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 14 replies · +1 points

There will be people more capable of helping the collective than others. There will be members who will be more involved in the business of the collective more than others. In a collective of 7 million, each member may get one vote, but 7 million voices are not heard equally. That's not the goal, but it is inevitable and a form of hierarchy.

The goal is not to get rid of hierarchies, it's to ensure the hierarchy a) works for the good of all and b) has its powers properly recognized and restricted.

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 16 replies · +1 points

"with making away with all hierarchies"

I'm curious to know how this would work. When humans organize on any sort of non-trivial scale, hierarchies always seem to form.

14 years ago @ Black Sun Journal - At... - Anarchy: The Civil Dis... · 2 replies · +1 points

"rational self-interest"

It would be nice if everyone behaved this way. Unfortunately, life does not work like this.

"I use Google's mail server gmail and thanks to their free market solutions, I hardly ever see any spam in my inbox. Market anarchy win."

Perhaps it's solved for you. Spammers would not continue to spam without the motivation of money. They are still making money. The free market has NOT solved this problem.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with Liquid_Egg

People I'm following

Liquid_Egg