Daily Anarchist Forum
August 20, 2019, 09:28:22 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Questions about Anarcho-capitalism and military.  (Read 11532 times)
haxor
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 65



View Profile WWW
« on: November 09, 2012, 09:12:03 PM »

These questions have been debatable and even i still have doubts in some respects. Wanted to know answers that may help my research.

Military:
In an Anarcho-capitalist society how would the military be constant?

Could this military withstand all attacks and always defend its citizens?


Under some arguements their would be many different "companies" so could these companies work together against a large organized enemy?
Would this military be all voluntarily and would there be a standing army?

Under Laissez fair capitalism the "limited" government would ask for voluntary donations for funding and advancing warfare technology, so how would an anarcho military type be better and would it advance faster?

If there is a private company that we would pay for protection what would keep it from growing large and just "occupy" its citizens? (after all human nature can be cruel at times)

I do have my own opinions concerning these questions but i like to research and get peoples different opinions as though discussion we solve and become more enlightened.

thanks
Logged

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Ayn Rand
ff42
Full Member
***
Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2012, 10:20:04 PM »

Stephan Molyneux ()http://www.freedomainradio.com/)  has answered these questions several times in his (free) books, podcasts, etc.

The idea of not needing a military is also addressed in http://anarchism.net/steppes.htm (a fun novelette).

Your words of "its citizens" are offensive to my anarchists ears.

Here is my (non-unique) thoughts:   If there is a taxing/regulation structure in place it is tempting to overthrow those that control it (and have them hand over the reigns).  If one has to fight each and every household to gain control them one might not invade.

Who would you do business with Company A which has opens books an a 10 Million bond that is held by a third party and promised to the first person show they have more weapons then their books or Company B which has closed books and charges 10% more (because they are hording weapons)?

Some have proposed that the country have no army/navy, but just a few defensive nukes.  If invaded they bomb. 

Logged
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2012, 10:22:15 PM »

Some thoughts might be found in various threads throughout the forum. 

http://dailyanarchist.com/forum/index.php/topic,791.0.html
Logged

haxor
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 65



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2012, 11:02:49 PM »

Hope that doesnt offend you to much or i imagine it is hard to live in this world for you. let me reword it as "a member of a Anarcho-society.

A country will always need a way to defend itself, therefore it will need a type of military of system of fefence. rather its private funding, voluntarily donations, or taxation.

The Nuke solution is not reality, set off 5 of those and their will be no need for us to contemplate Anarchism or free markets. It would be pointless so that would not be a solution to defence. Owning some for the defence of the society, sure, but owning nukes and nothing else is not a fail safe plan. Plus this does not fit the type of Anarcho-capitalist i wouldnt think, beings most speak of peaceful solution unless defending. eeven in defence theirs no point on that many innocents paying the price.

I havent yet to find a concrete answer to these questions. I have found answers but then Anarcho-capitalist dont agree. But if giving the message of this type of philosophy then we as practitioners should have a answer that is logical and be able to defend.
Logged

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Ayn Rand
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2012, 11:34:00 PM »

Hope that doesnt offend you to much or i imagine it is hard to live in this world for you. let me reword it as "a member of a Anarcho-society.

A country will always need a way to defend itself, therefore it will need a type of military of system of fefence. rather its private funding, voluntarily donations, or taxation.

The Nuke solution is not reality, set off 5 of those and their will be no need for us to contemplate Anarchism or free markets. It would be pointless so that would not be a solution to defence. Owning some for the defence of the society, sure, but owning nukes and nothing else is not a fail safe plan. Plus this does not fit the type of Anarcho-capitalist i wouldnt think, beings most speak of peaceful solution unless defending. eeven in defence theirs no point on that many innocents paying the price.

I havent yet to find a concrete answer to these questions. I have found answers but then Anarcho-capitalist dont agree. But if giving the message of this type of philosophy then we as practitioners should have a answer that is logical and be able to defend.

Five is actually not a lot of nukes.  That said, I don't think an ancap society would require any.  

Did you watch that video about free market defense?
« Last Edit: November 10, 2012, 12:02:14 AM by Syock » Logged

MAM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


Life is Sacred


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2012, 12:11:37 AM »

You yourself have pointed out that capitalism rewards the creative. Furthermore how can we have the answers? The State has a monopoly on defence therefore no one innovates.

That being said I have some thoughts on the subject whether they are unique or not I don't know... For all I know Molynuex says the same things I'm about to but I have an extreme aversion for that man so I refuse to watch his videos.

Here are my thoughts:

Defence is by definition reactionary therefore a constant military presence is not defence it is occupation, and is counter productive.

I believe each person is responsible for their own safety. I believe it is my responsibility as a person to be able to defend myself. I take my own defence measures. Let's consider the reality when seconds count the police/defence agent is only minutes away... Seems kind of silly to put my safety in the hands of someone who isn't going to be there when SHTF (they can't be there all the time) and it seems equally silly to put it in the hands of a stranger, I mean who cares more about my safety me or some stranger?

As far as an organization goes I like the idea of a Militia more than anything (a militia being people coming together in time of need).

Honestly though if each person is armed and capable of using their weapons then the military becomes a non factor.
Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin

"Hey... it's a haiku

Democracy is
Two Zombies and a Sheriff
Deciding on Lunch."-Davi Barker
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2012, 08:34:23 AM »

Defence is by definition reactionary therefore a constant military presence is not defence it is occupation, and is counter productive.

I believe each person is responsible for their own safety. I believe it is my responsibility as a person to be able to defend myself. I take my own defence measures. Let's consider the reality when seconds count the police/defence agent is only minutes away... Seems kind of silly to put my safety in the hands of someone who isn't going to be there when SHTF (they can't be there all the time) and it seems equally silly to put it in the hands of a stranger, I mean who cares more about my safety me or some stranger?

As far as an organization goes I like the idea of a Militia more than anything (a militia being people coming together in time of need).

Honestly though if each person is armed and capable of using their weapons then the military becomes a non factor.

Personally I hate the concept of a militia.  If the enemy is running around on your land, you lose either way.  Destruction and violations of people and property will never be able to be fixed.  I also think having everyone capable of using their weapons is no substitute for modern military equipment.  

I would expect there to be automated systems to defend the country, funded through insurance companies.  You don't need tanks, jet fighters, submarines, aircraft carriers and so many people for defensive war.  Much of the cost of military as we know it is for offensive action.  

"But we need to be able to strike back at those that attack us!"  

Do we really?  If we are capable of defending ourselves effectively, why would they waste the effort?  Why would it be worth the extra expense to us?  If you really want to get them, put a bounty on the head of the guy in charge.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2012, 08:40:58 AM by Syock » Logged

MAM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


Life is Sacred


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2012, 12:56:10 PM »

That's my point though if everyone has a weapon and knows how to use the feasibility of invading the land is reduced. I mean What's the point when you are going to have to fight everyone in the land you're invading?
Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin

"Hey... it's a haiku

Democracy is
Two Zombies and a Sheriff
Deciding on Lunch."-Davi Barker
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2012, 01:53:24 PM »

That's my point though if everyone has a weapon and knows how to use the feasibility of invading the land is reduced. I mean What's the point when you are going to have to fight everyone in the land you're invading?

Lets look at history for some real world examples.  

Somalia - Somalia is the only country in recent history to achieve ancap.  They only had it for a few years though.  The USA has been rather persistent with the idea that we are doing them a favor by setting up a government for them.  The US has invaded.  There was the big story of Black Hawk Down that took place there.  (In which 18 US soldiers died, and between 300 and 3,000 Somalis were injured or died.)  That caused the US to leave.  The US wasn't done trying to help them though.  There has been an ongoing proxy war, funded by the US to force a government on them.  In order to fight back, they have essentially given up the ancap for militia warlords.  The USA reached its goal and doesn't even know it.  

Angola - The 'blood diamonds' there devastated the country.  One guy looking to take over the country, managed to convince people to help him.  They took over some diamond mines and with that funding were able to launch a very gruesome war on the population.  They beat back the government army and even took over the capital for awhile.  This large force armed primarily with ak-47's, which beat an army and scared the UN away, got its ass kicked by a small technologically advanced mercenary group that were hired.  After the mercenaries chased them all out, they were fired, left the country and the whole thing happened again.  

Ancient Europe - The Celts were fairly close to what we consider ancap.  They were spread across Europe.  They had trade lines around the world long before the Greeks and Romans.  They all were armed, but lacked the numbers and training of a regular army.  They fought to protect their little bit of land, and didn't all swarm onto the boarder to help when the Romans started to expand.  The large concentrated Roman army easily crushed the little groups of Celts that fought back to protect their land, lives and gold, that funded the expansion of Rome for quite some time.   Does this happen to remind you of what happened when Europeans found the Americas 1,000 years later?


You may find those examples not to your liking, but the technological disparity of a drone with night vision and infrared flying over you is no different.  You need to have tech to fight tech.  Individuals can't afford that.  If you wait till they are among you, you lose even if you win.  The costs are extreme.  
 
« Last Edit: November 10, 2012, 02:00:47 PM by Syock » Logged

MAM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


Life is Sacred


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2012, 07:02:55 PM »

That's my point though if everyone has a weapon and knows how to use the feasibility of invading the land is reduced. I mean What's the point when you are going to have to fight everyone in the land you're invading?

Lets look at history for some real world examples.  

Somalia - Somalia is the only country in recent history to achieve ancap.  They only had it for a few years though.  The USA has been rather persistent with the idea that we are doing them a favor by setting up a government for them.  The US has invaded.  There was the big story of Black Hawk Down that took place there.  (In which 18 US soldiers died, and between 300 and 3,000 Somalis were injured or died.)  That caused the US to leave.  The US wasn't done trying to help them though.  There has been an ongoing proxy war, funded by the US to force a government on them.  In order to fight back, they have essentially given up the ancap for militia warlords.  The USA reached its goal and doesn't even know it.  

Angola - The 'blood diamonds' there devastated the country.  One guy looking to take over the country, managed to convince people to help him.  They took over some diamond mines and with that funding were able to launch a very gruesome war on the population.  They beat back the government army and even took over the capital for awhile.  This large force armed primarily with ak-47's, which beat an army and scared the UN away, got its ass kicked by a small technologically advanced mercenary group that were hired.  After the mercenaries chased them all out, they were fired, left the country and the whole thing happened again.  

Ancient Europe - The Celts were fairly close to what we consider ancap.  They were spread across Europe.  They had trade lines around the world long before the Greeks and Romans.  They all were armed, but lacked the numbers and training of a regular army.  They fought to protect their little bit of land, and didn't all swarm onto the boarder to help when the Romans started to expand.  The large concentrated Roman army easily crushed the little groups of Celts that fought back to protect their land, lives and gold, that funded the expansion of Rome for quite some time.   Does this happen to remind you of what happened when Europeans found the Americas 1,000 years later?


You may find those examples not to your liking, but the technological disparity of a drone with night vision and infrared flying over you is no different.  You need to have tech to fight tech.  Individuals can't afford that.  If you wait till they are among you, you lose even if you win.  The costs are extreme.  
 

I'm not sure why you are so convinced that this tech out of the range of the individual... I mean we can make our own drones so...
Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin

"Hey... it's a haiku

Democracy is
Two Zombies and a Sheriff
Deciding on Lunch."-Davi Barker
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2012, 07:43:33 PM »

I'm not sure why you are so convinced that this tech out of the range of the individual... I mean we can make our own drones so...

When you say that, you are talking about model airplanes with webcams attached to them.  There are much more sophisticated drones.  

Can you afford the tech to detect and take out this sucker, before it does that to you?  Most countries can't make such claims.

« Last Edit: November 10, 2012, 07:46:09 PM by Syock » Logged

MAM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


Life is Sacred


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2012, 08:17:13 PM »

I'm not sure why you are so convinced that this tech out of the range of the individual... I mean we can make our own drones so...

When you say that, you are talking about model airplanes with webcams attached to them.  There are much more sophisticated drones.  

Can you afford the tech to detect and take out this sucker, before it does that to you?  Most countries can't make such claims.



No but honestly my plans for surviving that sucker don't involve me taking it out. It involves me hiding my ass in the mountains and making my life not worth the missle it would cause to take it. Or if I'm bogged down fighting the State I guess I'll just die.

Like I said on another post drones scare me a shit load more than the FBI because if the FBI comes for me I can fight back, I can't do that with drones.

Let's look at another fact, I don't need to hire nor do I need to participate with a defence agency when the State collapses and SHTF I'll be stealing State manufactured weapons, and the first thing I'm going to steal is this or some variant of it. But honestly I don't expect to live to see the end of the State. I'm thinking multi-generational...
Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin

"Hey... it's a haiku

Democracy is
Two Zombies and a Sheriff
Deciding on Lunch."-Davi Barker
MAM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


Life is Sacred


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2012, 08:29:23 PM »

This isn't to say that you don't have a point. But that doesn't change my preference. By the time we have a free society I think the various gubberments are going to be busy with their own populi. Of course I've been wrong before and I could be wrong again. I just prefer to burn my bridges when I come to them Smiley.
Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin

"Hey... it's a haiku

Democracy is
Two Zombies and a Sheriff
Deciding on Lunch."-Davi Barker
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2012, 09:25:40 PM »


No but honestly my plans for surviving that sucker don't involve me taking it out. It involves me hiding my ass in the mountains and making my life not worth the missle it would cause to take it. Or if I'm bogged down fighting the State I guess I'll just die.

Like I said on another post drones scare me a shit load more than the FBI because if the FBI comes for me I can fight back, I can't do that with drones.

Let's look at another fact, I don't need to hire nor do I need to participate with a defence agency when the State collapses and SHTF I'll be stealing State manufactured weapons, and the first thing I'm going to steal is this or some variant of it. But honestly I don't expect to live to see the end of the State. I'm thinking multi-generational...

You are making many of my points for me.  

I don't believe the original question posed was about surviving SHTF.  It was about how an ancap society defends itself.  That includes defending cities, infrastructure, business, and of course all the millions of people.  

I never said you had to participate in paying a defense agency.  I was saying that they would have weapons like that automated anti-drone weapon you linked.  Technology like that is how an ancap society survives and thrives.  
Logged

MAM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


Life is Sacred


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2012, 10:12:29 PM »


No but honestly my plans for surviving that sucker don't involve me taking it out. It involves me hiding my ass in the mountains and making my life not worth the missle it would cause to take it. Or if I'm bogged down fighting the State I guess I'll just die.

Like I said on another post drones scare me a shit load more than the FBI because if the FBI comes for me I can fight back, I can't do that with drones.

Let's look at another fact, I don't need to hire nor do I need to participate with a defence agency when the State collapses and SHTF I'll be stealing State manufactured weapons, and the first thing I'm going to steal is this or some variant of it. But honestly I don't expect to live to see the end of the State. I'm thinking multi-generational...

You are making many of my points for me.  

I don't believe the original question posed was about surviving SHTF.  It was about how an ancap society defends itself.  That includes defending cities, infrastructure, business, and of course all the millions of people.  

I never said you had to participate in paying a defense agency.  I was saying that they would have weapons like that automated anti-drone weapon you linked.  Technology like that is how an ancap society survives and thrives.  

By the time we have an ancap society are drones like that even going to be necessary? Are they really? Who's gonna have them? Even if they aren't gone in the violence leading up to them I don't imagine them doing much but rusting in some hanger somewhere. I suppose someone with a desire to rule might make one. I don't know, but by the time we're free I think the militia is all we're gonna need.
Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin

"Hey... it's a haiku

Democracy is
Two Zombies and a Sheriff
Deciding on Lunch."-Davi Barker
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!