Daily Anarchist Forum
October 16, 2021, 08:09:27 PM *
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  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Questions And Challenges / Questions About Anarcho-Capitalism / Re: 20 hard questions! Challenge on: August 18, 2013, 06:23:16 AM
Great answers Thorax, I'm starting to get a clearer picture, and a free society doesn't seem so elusive as it used to. But still, I think the biggest problem I have with all this is that you guys seem to underestimate the dangers of the world, since you are (in all scenarios) anti-border, anti-spies, anti-war. Now, I know you will think I'm paranoid and that this is government propaganda, but take Iran again. Do you know what it feels like to be religious? And really believe it? If you were raised religious as a kid, you probably know. The leaders of Iran aren't semi-religious, they are oppressing women and executing gay people because of their religion. Their prophecy says that the end times will begin when western civilization is destroyed. They have banned foreign inspectors to their nuclear program. Is that really something you would ignore? No spies, no possibility of pre-emptive strikes?

You all mention the border with Canada, but Canada is already a very peaceful and civilized country. Think about all the countries that are bordering Russia. They all have a lot of security there for a reason. Russia is allied with Iran and Syria and other bad regimes. Hypothetically, what if Assad used his Russian allies to strike a large chemical attack in another European country who supports the rebels? A simple border where people are checked before going in could fix this problem.

And just as a hypothetical, what if you managed to become a free society, and you had suicide bombers coming in and murdering your people every day, from the outside? Like Israel's situation before they put up fences.

I'm just saying, if we want a free society, this is the stuff that people will have objections too, and they need good solutions.
2  Questions And Challenges / Questions About Anarcho-Capitalism / Re: 20 hard questions! Challenge on: August 15, 2013, 11:17:13 AM
Thanks for the answers guys. Smiley I think some of my questions were misunderstood or avoided, I guess I'll have time to clarify later when I get time, but still, great answers. Smiley
3  Questions And Challenges / Questions About Anarcho-Capitalism / 20 hard questions! Challenge on: August 14, 2013, 05:34:29 PM
Hi everyone, I'm not an anarchist, but I think it's an interesting and moral stance, maybe you can convince me that anarchism is the answer, but there are many questions I need solutions to first... This is gonna be a long post with 20 questions, so sorry in advance for the length:

1. A functioning anarchist society would have to be based on the non-aggression principle and private property, right? But what if someone prints their own money, how could they be punished, legally? They're not hurting anyone directly by printing fake money, even though it leads to inflation. Are money gonna be "copyrighted"? Are courts gonna be flexible? And what about the gold standard, won't that give additional benefits to countries that already have a lot of gold stored?

2. Okay, let's say a country manages to become totally free. Naturally, a whole lot of people from all over the world will want to move there, how can we preserve forests and water reserves, if people wanna build a huge amount of new homes? How many people will own a local forest, and why will they get it, and not anyone else? How will the owners decide what to do with it? Democratically?

3. What about secret police, inside the free society and in potential threatening countries like Iran, North Korea and so on? Will we be able to legally fund them? If someone is caught wiretapping the homes of radical Muslims or some morbid gothic person, who have not yet done anything wrong, will the free voluntary courts be able to dismiss the charges against the spy because of security reasons? Can't this easily lead to oppression of minorities?

4. Who will decide how much pollution or radiation is tolerable on a property? Can't this lead to minorities with asthma and certain illnesses being legally trampled by the majority's opinions? What about patents and copyrights, people say 15 years is an adequate limit, why? How do we defend that philosophically? If we "just need a limit", could we also need a limit for how many acres of forests should be protected? What about levels of noise from neighbours or factors? And then suddenly we end up with specific laws again, instead of the simplistic beauty of the non-aggression principle?

5. There was a story a couple of years ago about some scientists who made a new virus that could be incredibly fatal and lead to civilizational damage, and they put the recipe out on the internet I think, I don't have the link to the story, but I'm sure you heard about it. How could we stop things like that? And people putting out recipes for bombs? Or people who have made bombs on their own property? There was even a Swede some years ago who made a nuclear reaction in his kitchen. They are not violating the NAP, so if someone were to kidnap these guys and put them in prison, and these prisoners would sue them, could the courts just "be reasonable" again, and not accept the charges?

6. Imagine this, you are now the president of Iraq, where Sunni extremists are killing Shia Muslims with carbombs all the time. How do you solve this? Can you solve this in a moral way without violating individual rights? Go against your principles and run a police state, and hope for a future in which people will be ready for something better?

7. Should civilians be allowed to own machine guns and anti-aircraft weapons, in case certain police and military groups band together to try to form a state? Would an enormously armed population lead to more peace?

8. So, there's no bank bailouts, right? What if a bank suffers a big robbery or cyber/terrorist attack, and this causes the bank's customers to lose their money? Is that simply a risk people will have to take?

9. Something like the FDA, how would that be handled? Of course private companies could do quality check of products, but would you have to look for their symbol on every product you buy? Or maybe shops could sell products from these quality ensurers only. But what about guns? Sure, gun stores could have signs like "We only sell guns to people with this and this license", but wouldn't gun shops who sold guns to anyone, including criminals, schizophrenics and so on, also have a good market and stay in business?

10. Really mentally ill people and heroin addicts, could we put them in mental hospitals and rehabilitation camps, and would the same system apply where courts could be reasonable if these people filed charges? And drop the charges? And if courts are gonna be flexible and there are no absolute laws, won't it be very easy for mafias or sneaky rich people to bribe the juryes, or just charge with a court that they own themselves, and get away with heinous stuff, or make innocent people fall guys? Can't this very easily lead to mafia wars or even civil wars?

11. Who will own the borders, military groups? And can they deny people access to pass? Should there be no borders? If so, then it will be very easy for terrorists to get in with chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons that could otherwise be easily detected. For example, the US has systems that can detect chemical weapons coming near it's borders, maybe also nuclear and biological weapons.

12. There's a suburban neighbourhood with a lot of homes who all share a water supply, what happens if the owners of the water raises the prices? People say that other water companies could drive in there with trucks of water and water bottles, really? One house uses quite a lot of water, and transportation is expensive... But maybe the owners of the homes could own the water reserves? I've heard that contracts in the past used to include water access, that you wouldn't have to pay for.

13. I see that some anarchists are anti-war, well, if we hadn't stopped Hitler and Japan, they would increase their evil and possibly eventually conquer the world. If we faced the same threat today, isn't it right to strike pre-emptively? Iran are now working on clandestine nuclear programs, and their nutjob leaders (who also terrorize their own people obviously) have prophecies that the end times will begin after Judeo Christian civilization is destroyed, let's say our spies in Iran warn us that the nuclear weapons are almost complete, isn't it right to attack them and disarm them?

14. What will be the hardest challenges in a free society? Will people stop funding the military because they forget it's importance? Will a group of policemen and/or military men band together to form a state, and we'll have to fight them? Will societal attitudes lead to laws and possibly even a government again? Because "people aren't paying enough to the military or to people who can't afford health insurance", etc

15. Telling kids about hell or circumcising them, will that be reason for a voluntary child protective service to take the kids?

16. A lot of these dilemmas need the general population, who are gonna be jurymen in courts and so on, to have reasonable values, so, is a free society only possible if the philosophical foundation in people's lives are changing first? What about technology, is a free society only possible in our time of technology and information, or could it have worked in any age and place in history? Before modern detective work, wouldn't it be a lot easier to get away with crimes, and therefore you may have needed a fierce state in the past to uphold some order?

17. Many conservatives will think that  it's good for kids to see some horrible stuff (traffic accidents, Holocaust footage) and maybe even be slapped lightly if they do something wrong in order for them to behave and to be aware of the dangers of the world, so they can protect it when they get older. If we give our kids a purely wonderful childhood with no "darkness", won't they be, on some emotional level, oblivious to the fact that there are really dangerous people in the world we need to protect ourselves from? If we as humans are born "gorillas", don't we need discipline in childhood to not turn out to be violent and sociopathic bastards?

18. Is it good to campaign for conservative or minarchist parties to give people a taste of the wonders of freedom and personal responsibility? I know that many libertarians and anarchists refuse to vote and will not encourage others to vote, but is that really smart?

19. What would you say to so-called "socialist anarchists"? People who want no hierarchy and no private property and no money? How to win these people over? Do they need an explanation of how the economy works, or something else?

20. It's always important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Does every intelligent person have a "blind spot"? Ayn Rand was brilliant, but couldn't imagine a society with no state. Stephen Hawking is brilliant, but can't imagine how there could be a creator of the universe. Stefan Molyneux is brilliant, but he doesn't seem to understand determinism. (And regarding that, do you people believe in free will? I personally don't, but I think freedom is still a very moral and also powerful stance that unleashes human beings' talent, creativity and potential)
Pages: [1]
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!