Anarchy
Anarchy is tricky, because it carries a lot of preconcieved notions with it. Most people when they think of anarchy, think of the Sex Pistols acting like pricks or the LA riots or something along those lines.
For the purpose of this conversation, THAT is not what I'm talking about when I'm talking about anarchy. I don't consider that anarchy, but instead I consider that chaos. Anarchy is the absense of law and government, chaos is the absense of order. Anyone who argues that we need chaos is clearly an idiot, but believing in anarchy is a completely justifiable position, at least I hope it is, considering it's one of mine!
I don't think I'll live to see anarchy, at least not in the form I'm speaking of. I don't think it's possible.
For anarchy to be successful, the order provided by the government would have to be replaced by a substitute form of order, which is a complex idea, because how do you force order on someone over whom you have no formal authority? Hypothetically I believe that we would still have the united states as a voluntary body providing infrastructure, but there'd be a hell of a lot more than 50 states.
200 million people is far too many people to govern well or efficiently, and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar. If you have a rule, and you fill a room with say, 30 people who all broke the rule, chances are at least one of them has a justifiable reason for breaking the rule, and that goes for any rule. So what do you do? Leave it up to the judgement of trusted individules? Would these people have enough time to properly review each situation? And if so, could you really find that many people whose judgement you trust?
Or the other option is beurocracy, but is it really fair to punish the people with justifiable excuses solely because we're too lazy, as a society, to figure out a system in which those without a good reason are punished but the morally innocent aren't?
But if you split it all up into say 200 people in a group, and have a million of these groups, then the logistical problems with dealing with these issues would all be cured. And the other thing, people could find groups in which they fit in and feel comfortable, like, I'd probably end up in one that tolerated and accepted drug use (pot), but other than that was pretty traditional. There would be no governing rules that applied to all of these groups other than live and let live, and if you want to leave, go right ahead.
A big thing we'd rely on is the market. The market is an incredible force for justice if utilized correctly. Corporations are motvated by one thing, and that is money. Although to some this may seem callous and a reason why these things should be ignored, but that's the one way to ensure they will NEVER do what you want them to. When something is motivated by one, and only one thing, through use of this one motivator you could manipulate the thing into doing whatever you want. So if we made it more profitable to practice good fair business, it would be so, cause no corporation is being a dick solely for the purpose of being a dick.
But back to the idea that I don't think it's possible within my lifetime. Anyone who claims the government could be overthrown tomorrow and we'd be fine is a liar. People are far too dependent on the government, and thus not prepared at all for actual accountability. Over time, though, they could be taught and prepared.
The purpose of government is two fold, the first is to make the lives of its citizens as good as possible during its existance, and the other part is to prepare its citizens to live without it, and then dissolve itself.
For the purpose of this conversation, THAT is not what I'm talking about when I'm talking about anarchy. I don't consider that anarchy, but instead I consider that chaos. Anarchy is the absense of law and government, chaos is the absense of order. Anyone who argues that we need chaos is clearly an idiot, but believing in anarchy is a completely justifiable position, at least I hope it is, considering it's one of mine!
I don't think I'll live to see anarchy, at least not in the form I'm speaking of. I don't think it's possible.
For anarchy to be successful, the order provided by the government would have to be replaced by a substitute form of order, which is a complex idea, because how do you force order on someone over whom you have no formal authority? Hypothetically I believe that we would still have the united states as a voluntary body providing infrastructure, but there'd be a hell of a lot more than 50 states.
200 million people is far too many people to govern well or efficiently, and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar. If you have a rule, and you fill a room with say, 30 people who all broke the rule, chances are at least one of them has a justifiable reason for breaking the rule, and that goes for any rule. So what do you do? Leave it up to the judgement of trusted individules? Would these people have enough time to properly review each situation? And if so, could you really find that many people whose judgement you trust?
Or the other option is beurocracy, but is it really fair to punish the people with justifiable excuses solely because we're too lazy, as a society, to figure out a system in which those without a good reason are punished but the morally innocent aren't?
But if you split it all up into say 200 people in a group, and have a million of these groups, then the logistical problems with dealing with these issues would all be cured. And the other thing, people could find groups in which they fit in and feel comfortable, like, I'd probably end up in one that tolerated and accepted drug use (pot), but other than that was pretty traditional. There would be no governing rules that applied to all of these groups other than live and let live, and if you want to leave, go right ahead.
A big thing we'd rely on is the market. The market is an incredible force for justice if utilized correctly. Corporations are motvated by one thing, and that is money. Although to some this may seem callous and a reason why these things should be ignored, but that's the one way to ensure they will NEVER do what you want them to. When something is motivated by one, and only one thing, through use of this one motivator you could manipulate the thing into doing whatever you want. So if we made it more profitable to practice good fair business, it would be so, cause no corporation is being a dick solely for the purpose of being a dick.
But back to the idea that I don't think it's possible within my lifetime. Anyone who claims the government could be overthrown tomorrow and we'd be fine is a liar. People are far too dependent on the government, and thus not prepared at all for actual accountability. Over time, though, they could be taught and prepared.
The purpose of government is two fold, the first is to make the lives of its citizens as good as possible during its existance, and the other part is to prepare its citizens to live without it, and then dissolve itself.
posted by Galen at 5:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home