The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: What you don't see

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Sigh (see in situ)

What you don't see

Anarchists at Daily Paul have focused on explaining the moral superiority and logical consistency of anarchism leading critics to assume - which they do without study - that nevertheless it can't work, that armies will take over, that competing security services will fight for dominance, that prior "anarchism" failed to maintain itself, etc.

The only failure I see is that the anarchists have not addressed how it is to arrive. Once that is done the minarchist's objections should melt away.

The entire liberty movement is one of education. Ron Paul constitutionalists are in the same boat as anarchists. They will get nowhere until and unless their views become accepted by the bulk of the populace.

Accordingly, if anarchism is to become existant its main tenets will have already prevailed in the court of public opinion - that coercion is not an acceptable method for achieving social ends and that human relations should be voluntarily entered.

There has never in human history been a self-conscious philosophy of anarchism that existed on a large scale. There have been successful "anarchistic" societies that were eventually crushed by outside forces but it would be a stretch to assume their "anarchism" was the result of being thought out such that competing social systems were considered and thrown out. As in 17th century Pennsylvania there was a small anarchistic society but one of simply seeing no point in obeying the dictates of Britain's agents.

Now, however, there is a consistent body of anarchistic thought. Assuming this view gains influence government will wither. Once it withers to the extent Paulian minarchists want is such a populace going to, as you say, "As soon as someone gets an army, you can bet your boots that I'm going to want one and you're going to want one of our own to protect us from their army. This spirals into an arms race, etc, etc, etc..." ? Of course not.

You have ignored the point that the "Dispute Resolution Organisations" (DRO's) would exist like any other business - by serving thei customers. If some DRO did attempt to overpower others by force, which would be utterly opposed by the anarchistic populace, they would have the added problem of losing their revenue base as their customers would not be willing to pay the enomous costs of war. And why would they want war when they enjoy the abundance, peace and freedom of an anrchistic society?

You make the incredible assumption that it is easy to just raise an army and go invade a peaceful, anarchist society and overthrow it. If there is already an existant anarchistic society it, knowledge of its success in the modern world would sperad like wild fire, it would be seen not to pose a threat to other peoples, its full blown free markets would be enormously productive hence capable of defense and the main problem any aggressors would have - as ludicrous as it is to imagine there would even be any - would be to stop their military forces from deserting to join the anarchists - or better yet - ignore the dictates of "their" own government and thereby establish anarchy by default in their own area.