Anarchy = True Freedom?

A Primal Nut

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

To me, it sounds like a minor version of what happens in the world anyway, just that each area is smaller.

It would end up with each area being divided into capitalist democracies and other types of government. Leaders would rise to the top and there is probably nothing to stop a small group from forming an army, creating a dictatorship in a small area and attempting to stop people from leaving their tuatha. Then a nearby tuatha will decide this is unacceptable, form a small army and topple the tuatha...and take control....and so on.

I just don't think this is any more sustainable than the current system and doesn't seem as different in principle as you guys are making out. Whats the difference in each tuatha in Ireland having a central state vs each country in the EU having a central state?

I'm not sure the system of government is as important as people make out. Regardless of what system you use there are going to be lawyers, doctors and also people who clean toilets, pick mushrooms, etc. And I don't undersand why people always talk about absolute freedom - every place needs some kind of legal system.

pagancornflake

af_thefragile wrote: »

All socialism got us was the atomic bomb.
Something that could be used in a progressive way, the government used it in a destructive way.

I'm sorry af_, I know you have put alot of effort into this thread, but I have to ask (just about this bit above)... what in the hell are you on about???? These bombs were devised and built in the US in the 1940's???

af_thefragile wrote: »

Socialism/communism is a step back towards the monarchy/kingdom state we humans can't just seem to manage to step out of.

You seriously need to elaborate here. You are lumping communists in with the rests of socialists here and I must say that doing so is completely asinine.

af_thefragile wrote: »

All it needs is a change in mindset. But don't worry.
We libertarians will get our way anyway cuz freedom begins with the mind.
When you're free to believe you can do it, you will do it.

No change in mindset is needed. Free enterprise and innvoation being supressed in a socialist society is something which is both central to your argument and a blatant non-sequiter. While you can keep reiterating tiresome platitudes about "freedom being in the mind" and other ambiguous things, ultra-libertarians will never successfully get their way. This is because your model is prone to the same key weakness as communism- human nature.

The presupposition with anarchists (and communists) is that people will be content with not colluding together to take advantage of the lack of central regulation to form a hegemon to take advantage of neighbours (conversley, in communism, similar people are able to use the strict regulative system and excuses of "national security" to sieze power and do the same). Human nature makes both ideologies redundant. At least in communism there is a central state mechanism for dealing with these problems.

af_thefragile wrote: »

Imagine what would have had happened if Thomas Edison was a sheep and believed there was no possible way to create a light bulb that could last over 1000hours.

Imagine if the axioms behind that statement were completely invalid. Oh wait...

af_thefragile wrote: »

Of years athletes tried to break the 4min mile record. It was said the human body wasn't capable of breaking that barrier. It was the limit. But then in 1954 came this guy Roger Banister who was determined to break the rules. Who freed himself from all these imaginary barriers and manage to run a mile in under 4mins. He changed histroy.

All irrelevant unless you presuppose the conclusion of the thing which we are arguing about.

af_thefragile wrote: »

This is the power of a free mind. And you wanna constrict it back to make everyone act as sheep?? What great rewards lie there?

People are not nearly as stupid as you seem to think they are. Social democracy is the most prosperous system on the planet at this time in all measurable standards of living (go to nordicmodel.info for details). You are using this vanguard of "freedom" as a basis for attacking the system which is fulfilling the role of civilised society fantastically (i.e. to provide a good standard of living). A deliberative system exists for people to freely elect their representatives, a system of accountability exists to question, progressivley deliniate, or dissolve the civic bodies which are suspect in their preformance, and the society encourages free enterprise and innovation through government subsidy. The regulative systems ensure that hegemons are not being formed by these subsidised businesses on the taxpayers dime, the regulative systems themselves are progressivley becoming more accountable and transparent , and the revenue made from the taxpayers funds fantastic public services. Terrible.

af_thefragile wrote: »

Human aren't made to be sheep. Thats why we repeatedly rebel against those who try to make us one.

Humans arent made to be anything other than humans. Anything beyond "organism" is just a speculative principle and subject to change.

af_thefragile wrote: »

Anarchy is the law nature and its the only law that works.

There is no possible way you could say this because the model has never been successfully demonstrated in any way, shape of form. Nature is an inanimate anthropomorphic thing which does not legislate or make any decisions. This is political theory, aesthetics are tedious.

Lockstep

A Primal Nut wrote: »

To me, it sounds like a minor version of what happens in the world anyway, just that each area is smaller.

It would end up with each area being divided into capitalist democracies and other types of government. Leaders would rise to the top and there is probably nothing to stop a small group from forming an army, creating a dictatorship in a small area and attempting to stop people from leaving their tuatha. Then a nearby tuatha will decide this is unacceptable, form a small army and topple the tuatha...and take control....and so on.

I just don't think this is any more sustainable than the current system and doesn't seem as different in principle as you guys are making out. Whats the difference in each tuatha in Ireland having a central state vs each country in the EU having a central state?

I'm not sure the system of government is as important as people make out. Regardless of what system you use there are going to be lawyers, doctors and also people who clean toilets, pick mushrooms, etc. And I don't undersand why people always talk about absolute freedom - every place needs some kind of legal system.

The Tuatha were also rigid and highly stratified; different laws for different people, widespread slavery, what basically amounted to a theocracy (groupings of paruchiae or monastic federations that wielded power over local rulers), rules of law which transcended the groupings, women's rights which basically only gave them protection in relation to their ability to procreate and made them dependant on men etc etc.

I've heard both libertarians and socialists attempt to use Gaelic Ireland as an example of a society where their ideologies worked and it is none of these things. Basically it was not a nice place and I'm extremely glad I never lived there.