Anarchist brain drain

[Seth King]

Is it just Daily Anarchist, or have all of the best anarchist sites been dead on new content lately?

Granted, LRC, Stephan, etc. have been producing new content, but nothing that awesome.

I hope the slow period doesn't last too much longer. We need some awesome new stuff to come out at the end of the Presidential campaign to pick up all of the Paul supporters.

[JustSayNoToStatism]

I just don't know how much there is left to say, when it comes to monologues. When discussing and debating, you never run out of content, but with "one way" content there's only so much you can say to support anarchism before you're kicking a horse that's been dead for a while. That's why stef switched to doing mostly interviews. He said all he could say about anarchism.

What we need to do is get good at presenting the material succinctly and persuasively, in a way that is tailored for whoever is listening. I'm thinking of joining minarchist boards, and then "becoming" an anarchist once I've been a member for a while. Then I can debate and convert people without looking like a troll.

[Seth King]

My goal is still to make Daily Anarchist an activist site, very much like Daily Paul.

On Daily Paul there isn't TOO MUCH time spent philosophizing about minarchism. It's mostly tactics and strategies and personal accounts. Unfortunately, I just don't see much awesome stuff happening in the anarchist crowd yet. That's not to say it won't happen, just that I haven't seen it yet.

[Mark Stoval]

... Unfortunately, I just don't see much awesome stuff happening in the anarchist crowd yet. That's not to say it won't happen, just that I haven't seen it yet.

I hope you attain your goal. Good luck on that. I hope to help.

But you need to look at a longer term. Ron Paul is making headway (not enough perhaps) because the people are ready to listen to what he has to say. I can attest that I have heard nothing new out of Dr. Paul in years and years. He did not change his message; his audience changed!

We need to look beyond this election cycle just as you say. We need to move beyond one man being the symbol of liberty and freedom for so many and make the message itself the central issue. In fact, we need to look beyond the USA even --- as it is on the brink of bankruptcy and may not survive in its present state much longer.

The problem is tactics. I would much rather have a state as envisioned in the Articles of Confederation than what we have now. Big time!  I would even rather have a State as envisioned by the original meaning of the US Constitution than what we have now. But if I support either of these I am supporting evil. (ask the native Americans how warm and fuzzy the original State was)

Politics is the war of group against group --- how can I support that? But if we stay out of politics (Rothbard didn't) do we concede the field to our enemies?

"This shit ain't easy" --- a high school calculus student studying integration.

Well, "this shit ain't easy"! We have to grab a bunch of Paulicans who still believe in the political process even as we need to convince everyone that politics itself is the biggest problem! Damn, our path ahead is not so clear.

As to more front page content; I think articles on non-interventionism both at home and overseas would be great. What topics do you think would be best?

[Seth King]

My favorite front page articles are the ones that empower the reader.

[Mark Stoval]

My favorite front page articles are the ones that empower the reader.

Yes Seth, but knowing what sort of things you think "empower" the reader is the key, eh?

Some of us feel empowered by philosophy, morals and ethics as it relates to mankind and how he should act. (like "Human Action" no?) But others are much more interested in strategies and tactics in today's 3d world and how to employ them to get to an anarchy in the future.

Which category do you fall in?

[Seth King]

I tend to think that most of the people reading this site already have the philosophy down pretty well and are looking for tools. But I am constantly reminded by others that the philosophy shared on this site is what converted them, so I'm happy with both.

[kunkmiester]

It is indeed the tools.  I had googled "going agorist" or something like that when I found this place.  I knew what the agorist theory proscribed, I just had no real idea of how to find an agora, other like minded people, and get started on working on the physical side of opting out of the system.  I'm thinking around here, I'll have to start it out myself.  Sure, there's probably black and grey markets, but while those are still dominated by drugs and organized crime, they're really not what an agorist is looking for.

[Mark Stoval]

It is indeed the tools.  I had googled "going agorist" or something like that when I found this place.  I knew what the agorist theory proscribed, I just had no real idea of how to find an agora, other like minded people, and get started on working on the physical side of opting out of the system.  I'm thinking around here, I'll have to start it out myself.  Sure, there's probably black and grey markets, but while those are still dominated by drugs and organized crime, they're really not what an agorist is looking for.

You may have stumbled over the Mises Wiki page in your search. I did when searching on "agorist".

They say:

Agorism is the practice of counter-economics and the ideas associated with that practice. Agorist ideas assert that Libertarian philosophy occurs in practice, in the real world, as Counter-Economics. Although very similar to anarcho-capitalism, agorism is explicitly opposed to political elections and parliamentary strategies. Some agorists oppose intellectual property; some allow for certain forms of intellectual property.

Many anarcho-capitalists and voluntaryists are practicing agorists. There is no definitive policy statement from any authoritative leader of agorism because agorism is decentralized and non-hierarchical by definition.

Agorism (based on the principle of counter-economics) promotes withdrawing from the state and using counter-economic activities to minimize what a person contributes to the state in the form of taxes, license fees, and so forth.

This leads me to believe that the main difference between the two categories is the tactics involved. The anarcho-capitalists believe in participating in the present economy even as you fight against the present fascist economy and the oppressive government. The agorists seem to be saying (if the above quote is to be believed)  that one should "drop out" as we used to say in the streets long, long ago.

This reminds me of the inner conflict I have when I vote for Ron Paul. I don't vote; just encourages the bastards! BUT, I violate my ethics in Ron Paul's case as I believe he is as close to a libertarian politician as we have seen in American politics in my lifetime. (and that, my friends, is a long time) --- And I am going to get MAD if someone says I am therefor a pragmatist! 

A long front page article on tactics by various regulars here might be real interesting. The main theme: "how do we move towards freedom and liberty and away from the position we find ourselves in right now". Yes, a series by folks here might be a real draw. (do we even believe in gradualism at all?)

What do others think of that?

[kunkmiester]

I should say, I don't think I'm entirely agorist at this point, thank you for reminding me.  I came to realize a while ago that the state isn't going away anytime soon.  We'll have a revolution in a few years, but it won't get rid of the state entirely.  Even in the liberty movement, there are far too many people who think there should be a state, and far too many who can't live without one.  These people will set up a state.

This state will be much freer however, and will allow people to get used to far less government, and anarchist ranks will swell.  Part of the key here is information.  As information technology goes up the curve derived from Moore's Law, the collapse from liberty to tyranny to anarchy will happen faster and faster.  The 200 year rule about democracy and republic lifetimes hold for a certain level of information flow.  We've long since left that speed in the dust, and the next cycle will reflect it.  The "new republic" will be glorious, but it won't last as long, since much milder power grabs will be seen as tyranny, and it will be overthrown faster.  As this cycle accelerates, people will be forced to learn to live without a state, and as the anarchy stabilizes, the state becomes less relevant, and more obscure reflex until the limit of F(g) = 0.

In my opinion, anything that accelerates the destruction of the current state and advances the cycle is good.  Voting Ron Paul is good, since the time investment can be minimal, and it helps advance the cycle, either by shrinking and controlling government, or proving the tyranny and starting the revolution.  Opting out entirely isn't actually good, since staying engaged to some extent will let you educate people, and that education is the key--only when the majority is opposed to a state will a stateless society emerge.

[helio]

I've been feeling brain drain too.  My attitude has really changed in the past six months or more.  I've begun to feel bitter towards statists.  Rather than see them as people to be educated, ive begun to think they deserve an all powerful state that takes every last dime and personal liberty they have left.  This feeling is directed mostly to the hypocritical statists, the small government types especially. 

My thinking has shifted to thinking that the gas pedal of government power should be stepped on rather than slowed.  If the Austrians like Mises are right, then more gov control in economic matters will end gov influence faster than resistive political action or civil disobedience.  Im starting to think that those in the liberty movement should step out of the way and let the socialists burn down the house.  Or maybe even hand them the proverbial torch.

I cant wait to see how depressed and listless the minarchists and tea partiers get when the Obama boogeyman gets re-elected instead of their prefered tyrant-in-waiting, Romney.  Ive been considering an article on the matter but so far my drafts have turned into ranting.

[derick]

I've been feeling brain drain too.  My attitude has really changed in the past six months or more.  I've begun to feel bitter towards statists.  Rather than see them as people to be educated, ive begun to think they deserve an all powerful state that takes every last dime and personal liberty they have left.  This feeling is directed mostly to the hypocritical statists, the small government types especially. 

My thinking has shifted to thinking that the gas pedal of government power should be stepped on rather than slowed.  If the Austrians like Mises are right, then more gov control in economic matters will end gov influence faster than resistive political action or civil disobedience.  Im starting to think that those in the liberty movement should step out of the way and let the socialists burn down the house.  Or maybe even hand them the proverbial torch.

I cant wait to see how depressed and listless the minarchists and tea partiers get when the Obama boogeyman gets re-elected instead of their prefered tyrant-in-waiting, Romney.  Ive been considering an article on the matter but so far my drafts have turned into ranting.

This is exactly how I feel rght now too.

[Seth King]

That's how I've felt for a while. Libertarians are always talking about how we're losing our liberties like a frog in water that is slowly increasing in temperature. Well I think the reason we're losing our liberties so slowly isn't out of some grand conspiracy to take them away slowly, but instead because libertarians are putting up a fight in the arena. I agree. Stop fighting in the halls of Congress etc. and let the power mad destroy everything. Let the government CRIMINALIZE all of human behavior and let them make all offenses punishable by DEATH. Then we have no choice but to rebel or die.

[xphoenix]

I agree that the fighting in the halls of Congress should stop, but also remember the excellent point that Molyneux makes - change will only occur through a true education of younger generations. If we expect that the result of a police state will be revolution followed by a free anarchic society, I think we're setting ourselves up for disappointment. Those involved in a revolution will only believe that the police state was caused by the *particular* individuals or groups in power, not by nature of the state itself. Thus, they will simply try to reconstruct a state "the right way this time."

When the state falls, it will be with a wimper, not a violent bang. We have to learn to live peacefully in our own lives and pass that on to our descendants.

In general, the mindset of mankind is in a very primitive place right now. We all see this when we talk to statists and they ignore your ideas as quaint, stupid, or just not realistic. That is the kind of mindset that will take quite a while to fix - and that's assuming these ideas start to take root more broadly. Of course, there may be some critical mass that needs to be reached and things will fall like dominoes, but that is probably still a long way off. Realistically, it will be years, if not centuries, before mankind makes that kind of mental/societal shift (I really hope I'm wrong - it would really be fantastic to see it in my lifetime). We are truly living the allegory of the cave.

I think the agorist approach of just ignoring and avoiding the state as much as possible is a great approach (other than to point out what it is and avoid harassment).

[Seth King]

I agree that the fighting in the halls of Congress should stop, but also remember the excellent point that Molyneux makes - change will only occur through a true education of younger generations. If we expect that the result of a police state will be revolution followed by a free anarchic society, I think we're setting ourselves up for disappointment. Those involved in a revolution will only believe that the police state was caused by the *particular* individuals or groups in power, not by nature of the state itself. Thus, they will simply try to reconstruct a state "the right way this time."

When the state falls, it will be with a wimper, not a violent bang. We have to learn to live peacefully in our own lives and pass that on to our descendants.

In general, the mindset of mankind is in a very primitive place right now. We all see this when we talk to statists and they ignore your ideas as quaint, stupid, or just not realistic. That is the kind of mindset that will take quite a while to fix - and that's assuming these ideas start to take root more broadly. Of course, there may be some critical mass that needs to be reached and things will fall like dominoes, but that is probably still a long way off. Realistically, it will be years, if not centuries, before mankind makes that kind of mental/societal shift (I really hope I'm wrong - it would really be fantastic to see it in my lifetime). We are truly living the allegory of the cave.

I think the agorist approach of just ignoring and avoiding the state as much as possible is a great approach (other than to point out what it is and avoid harassment).

Well said. I just hope you're wrong about the time it will take to end the state.