Why liberal democracy is the best vaccine to the statist virus.

[Centinel]

Liberal democracy in general, or constitutional federal republicanism specifically is the only viable alternative to absolutism.

For example, constitutional federal republicanism is a societal 'prison' designed to limit, balance, decentralize, and make transparent the elements of political and military power.   Political and military power are the means by which statist gain and hold power to the detriment of society at large.

While anarchism provides no intentional mechanism to forestall the emergence of political and military cartels  AND since free markets are utterly unable to remove political and military cartels from power once they gain a territorial monopoly.   A mechanism must be in place to intentionally limit, balance, decentralize, and make transparent political and military power that is so destructive in the hands of the few.

Our founding fathers very nearly got the formula right in 1787.  However, we have seen that the prison they placed political and military despots has been eroded.  Indeed, the statist has found that economic coercion is the means by which they can gain power over free people.  hence, the original 'vaccine' of liberal democracy injected by some extraordinary thinkers in 1776 and later in 1787 needs a new version of vaccine to combat the mutated virus of economic statism.

Few would argue that our political and civil rights have NOT expanded even within the last 100 years (remember antietam, women's suffrage, manzanar, bull connor, et al) -- however, it is obvious that our economic freedoms have been trampled on.  Hence the need for an economic bill of rights.

What would this economic bill of rights include?

balanced budget amendment for starters (supported by the vast majority of Americans) , followed easily by an amendment limiting Federal government spending as a % of GDP, followed by the elimination of fiat money, followed by the elimination of Federal government regulation of ALL domestic commerce.

A Constitutional amendment process would provide the same vigorous universally accepted protections for economic rights that now exists for civil and political rights.

A Federal system will allow the individual states to assume the role of regulators of commerce within their own state borders. Obviously states will be competing for societal wealth, so they will be loath to enact onerous regulatory regimes.

A Republican system will continue to do what it does best -- balance central government power and protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

No such institutionalized mechanism to accomplish these ends exists within anarchist society --- nor could any be introduced without destroying the very tenet on which anarchism exists -- unlimited freedom.


In sum, constitutional federal republicanism in its most effective and intended form is not a 'prison' for the masses -- in contrast, it is a prison for the statists seeking unlimited power.  Essentially, an attenuated liberal democracy provides honest, productive, and  freedom loving citizens an arena/prison to house and stand watch over myriad aspiring despots to engage in endless fruitless attempts to seize power (at least for another 200 years -- remember there is no utopian system that can hold back the statist tide forever).  

[JustSayNoToStatism]

We have almost the same goals. We disagree on effective means.

Anarchism has failed, constitutionalism has failed. These are facts. Since then, the world has changed. We have new information. The failure of anarchism and constitutionalism in the past are not grounds for dismissing either, if we want to be completely fair. Looking FORWARD, what gives freedom the best chance? I would say general market anarchism, because it allows for pockets of competing institutions like minarchist/panarchist/communist/mutualist systems. That is, you could try out some sort of federalism (assuming you don't enslave, read:tax, your citizens). The market can be used to discover which rules of society work, and we can learn from each other. Would you let us have our true freedom? Would you attack us for not paying tribute to your central authority? If not, we have no quarrel, and I'm fine with trusting that you'll see yourself gravitate towards market anarchism more as time goes by.

[ff42]

Lots of assertions, but no proofs.    Frankly I don't care what you and your like minded associates wish to experiment with as long as you don't force me and my associates (or any unwilling third parties) to fund or participate in it. 

I believe thieves (people who would rather steal than honestly work) are drawn to any organization that has power over other people and that there can not exist a 'virus' to prevent them from running (and wining) for office.

[Josh D]

Lots of assertions, but no proofs.    Frankly I don't care what you and your like minded associates wish to experiment with as long as you don't force me and my associates (or any unwilling third parties) to fund or participate in it. 

I believe thieves (people who would rather steal than honestly work) are drawn to any organization that has power over other people and that there can not exist a 'virus' to prevent them from running (and wining) for office.

Well said.

[Centinel]

Lots of assertions, but no proofs.    Frankly I don't care what you and your like minded associates wish to experiment with as long as you don't force me and my associates (or any unwilling third parties) to fund or participate in it.  -- ff42

Reality is sometimes cruel.

Whether you like it or not, we were both born into the same 'home owner's association'.  If you don't want to follow the rules or pay your dues -- then you can move, gain political power within the rules of the 'association', disregard the rules and suffer punishment, or take power by coercive means.

I believe thieves (people who would rather steal than honestly work) are drawn to any organization that has power over other people and that there can not exist a 'virus' to prevent them from running (and wining) for office.--ff42

if the federal government didnt have the power to regulate, tax, spend, et al beyond what is constutionally allowed by a balanced budget amendment, limit on spending as a % of GDP, private money, et al --- then it really wouldn't matter who got elected (except for national defense which wouldnt be an issue for an economically and technologically powerful and prosperous capitalist society).

Moreover, if states assumed the role of taxation and regulation, then they would be loath to abuse their productive citizenry since hard-working honest folk would flee these destructive states (Massachusetts, Illinios, California, et al).

Indeed, our constitution has been pretty effective at protecting civil and political rights the last 230 years -- it is possible to extend these protections to private property.

it is better than an anarchist alternative.

And we are still in the same home owners association, so we cant do much without each others support.

[Josh D]

it is better than an anarchist alternative.

You forgot the "In my opinion,..."

[MAM]

Liberal democracy in general, or constitutional federal republicanism specifically is the only viable alternative to absolutism.

Re: Why liberal democracy is the best vaccine to the statist virus.

So what we have now is somehow magically different and superior to what we have now. Makes perfect sense.

[JustSayNoToStatism]

Oh no, not these threads...

[MAM]

Oh no, not these threads...

Hah!