“Anarchy can never work?”
Feb 21, 2015 15:18:54 GMT -5
Post by Michael Downing on Feb 21, 2015 15:18:54 GMT -5
ncrenegade.com/editorial/anarchy-can-never-work/
“Anarchy can never work?”
Semantic precision – for the purpose of this post, “anarchy” means a complete absence of coercive rulers; “social good” means a beneficial economic or social result for ALL participants in a given transaction or activity.
Frequently we hear statists proclaim that anarchy can never work. Let’s give that some thought.
For starters, they invariably neglect to define that term as they understand its meaning. The implication that must be drawn however is that they view anarchy, not as defined above, but as just another political system like democracy. The thought that anarchy, since it involves no ruler(s), is in fact the absolute opposite of a political system never seems to occur to them.
The idea that anarchy should or could somehow be made to work (or not) is utter nonsense. Anarchy is best described not as a working system but as a “state of being”. A society or division of labor process that is in anarchy is in constant spontaneous flux. Its observable rate of change takes place at such a rapid rate and with such near infinite numbers of variables and combinations as to be impossible to catalogue, let alone be managed with any justifiable confidence in the outcome.
Then there is another conveniently overlooked question. To what ends any social “system” is supposed to work is never spelled out or discussed. If asked, they will respond with such vague collectivist bromides as “why, the common good, of course”. When one probes, “for the common good” always means “for the majority” and thus is not “common” at all as it excludes (victimizes) the “minority”. A logical fallacy if ever there was one.
“Anarchy can never work?”
Semantic precision – for the purpose of this post, “anarchy” means a complete absence of coercive rulers; “social good” means a beneficial economic or social result for ALL participants in a given transaction or activity.
Frequently we hear statists proclaim that anarchy can never work. Let’s give that some thought.
For starters, they invariably neglect to define that term as they understand its meaning. The implication that must be drawn however is that they view anarchy, not as defined above, but as just another political system like democracy. The thought that anarchy, since it involves no ruler(s), is in fact the absolute opposite of a political system never seems to occur to them.
The idea that anarchy should or could somehow be made to work (or not) is utter nonsense. Anarchy is best described not as a working system but as a “state of being”. A society or division of labor process that is in anarchy is in constant spontaneous flux. Its observable rate of change takes place at such a rapid rate and with such near infinite numbers of variables and combinations as to be impossible to catalogue, let alone be managed with any justifiable confidence in the outcome.
Then there is another conveniently overlooked question. To what ends any social “system” is supposed to work is never spelled out or discussed. If asked, they will respond with such vague collectivist bromides as “why, the common good, of course”. When one probes, “for the common good” always means “for the majority” and thus is not “common” at all as it excludes (victimizes) the “minority”. A logical fallacy if ever there was one.