What’s funny is many of these “anarchists” don’t even understand what they’re pushing for - they don’t even understand anarchy in an economic sense.
In economic theory, anarchy is like an ultra libertarian’s wet dream. Without any form of enforcement of laws, laws are essentially meaningless and institutions just start doing whatever the fuck they feel like (AKA businesses do whatever will maximize profits). EPA enforcement out the window? Looks like your little “green movement” died. (After all, if the EPA fines or attempts to restrict a company and company just goes “lol, fuck off”, what is the EPA going to do? Send the non-existent police to bring them to trial? Force them to pay using the non-existent threat of serving prison time?) Private weapons ownership out the window? Looks like your neighbor isn’t just settling for a California compliant rifle, they’re going full auto. (What are you gonna do about it? Call the non-existent enforcers to seize their weapons?) You’re apart about “muh class inequality”? Get ready to be a whole lot more upset when you realize only affluent neighborhoods and regions can afford privatized security (that makes police look like child’s play) and that these contractors don’t give a fuck if you’re in need of help because, lo and behold, you don’t have a subscription to their service. Government sponsored workers rights? Non existent. Hope you’re okay trying to negotiate a decent wage.
These people are seriously to retarded to understand when they’re asking for the exact opposite of what they want.
Anarcho-communism (or one of the latest flavors of the month I’ve heard people labeling themselves as, anarcho-socialism) is a school I’m aware of but didn’t feel the need to touch on as a possibility in this “what if” scenario as it is an inconceivable joke.
It’s an interesting thought experiment, sure, but it is literally impossible. It would require a centrally planned and organized form of allocating resources and determining production.... without any form of formal central planning. It’s an oxymoron. People are just expected to magically know how much to produce of XYZ or how much to consume of ABC without any form of information from a market (i.e. prices) or without any top-down delegation from a central authority (i.e. a governmental body). There’s zero information in the system and people are still expected to make choices???
It’s like asking for a perpetual motion machine. Sure, life would be great if they could exist. But they quite literally can’t. I’ve yet to read a single book or article from someone that has put forward an at least mildly convincing argument that an anarcho-communistic society would be able to have any form of longevity and that it wouldn’t immediately turn into having a central government or into privatized institutions that behave competitively. In other words, a government is the end result or you go to anarcho-capitalism. Mises’s whole socialist calculation argument is amplified when you consider throwing “anarchy” into the mix as you’ve just entirely swept the last remaining leg out from under them and robbed them of their last remaining option for getting information.
Anarcho-communism is one of those schools of thought that when you talk to somebody about political economy and they say they subscribe to it, you feel like you need to ask if they’re joking.
Lack of legal repercussions usually argues that if some people feel like storming a place to steal, the owner has the natural right (which would be exercised) to turn them into a red mist. I’ve heard speakers talk about their studies of big corporations acting in, more or less, “lawless” areas of the world and how they offer protection and a form of societal stability to their employees in that area. We’re talking something closer to privatized militaries than a person or two with a handgun. I don’t think stealing would be all that easy to accomplish.
People shit all over the EPA all the time but take a look at the environmental damage China has straddled itself with by becoming the world leader in rare earth metals.
What’s funny is many of these “anarchists” don’t even understand what they’re pushing for - they don’t even understand anarchy in an economic sense.
In economic theory, anarchy is like an ultra libertarian’s wet dream. Without any form of enforcement of laws, laws are essentially meaningless and institutions just start doing whatever the fuck they feel like (AKA businesses do whatever will maximize profits). EPA enforcement out the window? Looks like your little “green movement” died. (After all, if the EPA fines or attempts to restrict a company and company just goes “lol, fuck off”, what is the EPA going to do? Send the non-existent police to bring them to trial? Force them to pay using the non-existent threat of serving prison time?) Private weapons ownership out the window? Looks like your neighbor isn’t just settling for a California compliant rifle, they’re going full auto. (What are you gonna do about it? Call the non-existent enforcers to seize their weapons?) You’re apart about “muh class inequality”? Get ready to be a whole lot more upset when you realize only affluent neighborhoods and regions can afford privatized security (that makes police look like child’s play) and that these contractors don’t give a fuck if you’re in need of help because, lo and behold, you don’t have a subscription to their service. Government sponsored workers rights? Non existent. Hope you’re okay trying to negotiate a decent wage.
These people are seriously to retarded to understand when they’re asking for the exact opposite of what they want.
The vast majority of anarchists wouldnt survive in an anarchists world.
Anarcho-communism (or one of the latest flavors of the month I’ve heard people labeling themselves as, anarcho-socialism) is a school I’m aware of but didn’t feel the need to touch on as a possibility in this “what if” scenario as it is an inconceivable joke.
It’s an interesting thought experiment, sure, but it is literally impossible. It would require a centrally planned and organized form of allocating resources and determining production.... without any form of formal central planning. It’s an oxymoron. People are just expected to magically know how much to produce of XYZ or how much to consume of ABC without any form of information from a market (i.e. prices) or without any top-down delegation from a central authority (i.e. a governmental body). There’s zero information in the system and people are still expected to make choices???
It’s like asking for a perpetual motion machine. Sure, life would be great if they could exist. But they quite literally can’t. I’ve yet to read a single book or article from someone that has put forward an at least mildly convincing argument that an anarcho-communistic society would be able to have any form of longevity and that it wouldn’t immediately turn into having a central government or into privatized institutions that behave competitively. In other words, a government is the end result or you go to anarcho-capitalism. Mises’s whole socialist calculation argument is amplified when you consider throwing “anarchy” into the mix as you’ve just entirely swept the last remaining leg out from under them and robbed them of their last remaining option for getting information.
Anarcho-communism is one of those schools of thought that when you talk to somebody about political economy and they say they subscribe to it, you feel like you need to ask if they’re joking.
Except that anybody with profit just gets robbed.
Lack of legal repercussions usually argues that if some people feel like storming a place to steal, the owner has the natural right (which would be exercised) to turn them into a red mist. I’ve heard speakers talk about their studies of big corporations acting in, more or less, “lawless” areas of the world and how they offer protection and a form of societal stability to their employees in that area. We’re talking something closer to privatized militaries than a person or two with a handgun. I don’t think stealing would be all that easy to accomplish.
People shit all over the EPA all the time but take a look at the environmental damage China has straddled itself with by becoming the world leader in rare earth metals.
Nobody wants to live in a toxic dump or breathe polluted air. I don't care what your political leanings are..