Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: You are not an anarchist if you want to use a state to change the world. State = violence, tyranny, evil, death and destruction

Posted 4 months ago on March 21, 2014, 8:56 a.m. EST by Freedomfeen (9)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

You are not an anarchist if you believe in using the initiation of force against peaceful people to accomplish your goals. Using men with guns to extract money or involuntary compliance from people is exactly why the world is in such a bad place. Initiating aggression is always immoral. In society-remembering that society is not the government, it is the people-we do not allow anyone to initiate aggression EXCEPT the state. We allow a huge moral exception for this parasitic and criminal organization. Just because men wear funny costumes, black dresses and act like they have a right to rule and dominate other human beings does not mean they actually do. If I do not have the right to go to my neighbors house and demand a portion of his income or use violence against him if he does something I do not like so long as he is not hurting my property, then no one else has that right either. It is impossible for an individual to delegate a right to a group that they did not have in the first place! If you don't have a right to steal and initiate force, you cannot delegate that right to a political party to do it for you.

No amount of voting makes the initiation of force moral. Just because 51% think we should hang jim for adultery or steal from rick to fund a new water fountain does not make it right. Is that the belief we want to embrace? That is acceptable to initiate force so long as you have enough people on your side? I hope we aspire to more lofty ambitions than tired and immoral democracy. Only through respect of the self ownership and dignity of the smallest minority (the individual) can we reach our full potential and leave behind a better world than we found.

It is foolish not to realize that someday someone else will have that power to initiate force, the true evolution is understanding the truth that no one should have the power to initiate force. There should be no state. Without a state there will be no corporations sine they will be unable to use this monopoly power to shutout their competition, the field wil truly be leveled when anyone can compete and the only barriers to entry are natural ones. Voluntary human association is moral and more efficient than immoral coercion and violence. End the state everywhere, set people free. Everything should be voluntary in an evolved society, if your initiating force and violating others you are the problem.

The evolution of humanity must come through peace, not taking over the immoral and illegitimate state and using its monopoly power to initiate force on our behalf. We are seeing this voluntary evolution occuring RIGHT NOW through inincredible technoligies like 3D printing, Bitcoin, Namecoin and blockchain based technologies. We are beginning to see the promise of these technologies;

Bitcoin blockchain technology will enable us to:

  • Conduct voluntary transactions without a third party sticking a straw into it and stealing money(the state or corporations)
  • Determine who owns what property with the need for a centralized authority
  • Free us from central banker imposed slavery with the first decentralized distributed currency
  • Create an alternative internet that cannot be taken down, censored or controlled (.bit)
  • Innovate without permission
  • Bring the power to get a loan, be your own bank, access financial instruments and create financial instruments to BILLIONS who are currently locked out of the financial system by corporations and governments

In addition to block chain technology, 3D printers make regulation and prohibition of goods (drugs, firearms, guns, patented items, etc) impossible and pointless. In places like detroit where the state has grown so parasitic that it destroyed the economy, freedom beginning to take hole as people refuse to pay taxes, voluntary services (like Detroit threat management - private security) are springing up to replace previously slave funded services and anarchists of all stripes are moving in to turn desolated lots into gardens and selling their products without government permission and without being stolen from by government goons. These new services do not point guns at peoples heads to earn their paycheck, they do so by serving their customers and earning the trust of the community. DTM has never killed a single person, compare that to the local police from anywhere. Because they have to earn their paycheck and cannot depend on just stealin it, they must provide people a good service and be responsive to market needs-unlike their statist equivalent who does not need to respond to the market since they get paid regardless of how many mentally retarded men they beat to death or dogs they shoot for no reason. People are asserting their right of self ownership and reclaiming their dignity as humans from the criminal gangs of the state.

Who will build the roads? People who want to make a profit by providing a service. Our technological advancement will not be held back by governments or corporations who seek to maintain their stranglehold on the markets, we may not even need roads! Who will put peaceful people in jail? No one because we will not tolerate the initiation of force nor the arbitrary creation of law by politicans. Our law will be natural law; don't hit, don't steal, don't kill, don't rape, don't commit fraud and don't initiate force. Who will protect us from invaders? We will along with market based security, we will not cower into statism for fear that we may be overtaken by another violent state, we will not shrink into fear and abandon liberty and our potential. But who will start the wars? No one because no one will have a claim to power any higher than another man and there will be no nation to attack.

The evolution is already happening peacefully. In the future states will become more and more irrelvant. They will be these big scary criminal organizations that swoop in every once in awhile to make examples of people (like they do with file sharing), but the vast majority of people will see their criminality and laugh at them as they fade into irrelevancy.

23 Comments

23 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by Freedomfeen (9) 4 months ago

What is anarchist about using a hierarchical power structure with a monopoly of violence to steal and initiate force and violence against peaceful people to pay for and implement the way YOU think things should. It is anarchist to leave people alone and mind your own business.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

so. It is as I said. The difference between anarcho-capitalists and nihilists is almost indistinguishable when applied to government theory and practice.

But how anyone in their right mind can sit on an OWS forum and proclaim that private security firms are better than law enforcement is completely beyond me. Don't get me wrong, I completely understand the resentment, the fear, the rage, that may exist among those who Occupied Freedom Square and who have friends or who are themselves, still confronted with some form of consequence imposed by the state for having acted as only true citizens and patriots must.

That does not alter the bleak lesson imposed by Black Water

You begin with a completely false premise, and that is that humanity is capable of voluntarily following the law. If this were so, then there would be no law. Noone would voluntarily eschew conflict, for everyone would voluntarily behave in a manner that did not give rise to conflict in the first place.

[-] 2 points by Freedomfeen (9) 4 months ago

You are completely wrong about your assertion that anarchocapitalists are nihilists. I am an atheist voluntaryist and I find tremendous value and meaning in my life. While I can only speak as an individual, the anarchocapitalist or more appropriately termed VOLUNTARYIST philosophy adheres to two moral principles: the Non Aggression principle and the self ownership principle. You own yourself and do not initiate force, fraud or coercion against others. What are your principles?

Saying that blackwater is a result of the market is like saying that Nike, Apple, Raytheon, Halliburton, Microsoft, etc are the result of capitalism. When in fact they are the result of crony capitalism (crapitalism) or fascism. Being unable to erect artificial barriers to entry against competitors and without utilizing regulatory capture to regulate their competition these companies would not have been the behemoths they are today. They would not have been able to utilize patents to crush innovation and competition either.

Blackwater is not example of a free market security service. It is an example of service arising to fulfill the needs of the state to dominate and murder other human beings. Because it's incentives are ass backwards and not market based, the state produces these kind of disgusting incentives.

Private security firms are better than law enforcement because they can be destroyed by defunding them, law enforcement can never be destroyed and is not responsive to it's customers because it can steal money at gunpoint to fund itself. Do people really want protectors that kick down doors to arrest people for ingesting something against the abritrary whim of a politican? Politician created law is not law.

If you behaved like your government you would be in jail or executed. If you don't have a right to steal from your neighbor, how can you vote to give that right to someone else?

Patriots? True citizens? You mean brainwashed slaves. I find religious state worship disgusting. It has been the sole cause for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people. Why do you need a leader, why not be your own leader?

A voluntary society won't be a perfect society, but its certainly better than giving one group a monopoly of force over everyone and a huge exception to the morality we all adhere to and were taught in kindergarten.

http://www.copblock.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Statism-CopBlock-300x244.jpg

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

a) What are your principles? and b) Why do you need a leader, why not be your own leader?

As to the nature and extent of my principles - let me have a few more steroids, as I refine my principles . . . .

Apparently you haven't noticed, but I do tend to march to my own drummer, always have. That does not change the fact that in 5000 years humanity has not been able to dispense with conflict as a means to an end, not as a matter of foreign policy, nor even among our personal affairs.

Quite the contrary. Our society has today devolved to a state where conflict over minor property issues has become a source of entertainment.

And when I said: the difference between anarcho-capitalists and nihilists is almost indistinguishable when applied to government theory and practice I did not say they were the same, only that the differences were almost indistinguishable from a truly nihilistic perspective, absent the physical evidence to the contrary.

The plain fact is that until you eliminate fear as a motivator of human behavior, you cannot establish any kind of society that is anything close to what you suggest.

This is because those whose fear drives them to accumulate large sums of cash will also be motivated to use that cash to erect high walls - and they will do so knowing full well that those high walls will obstruct my view, Having obstructed my view, they will know to look over their shoulder every single day for the rest of their lives without ever being told. Call it intuition. Their fear will cause them to intuit that necessity. Having grasped that necessity, they will of course then turn to some method of augmentation to their high wall - surveillance cameras perhaps, or high powered rifles with which to penetrate my asylum and produce my demise.

And it is virtually impossible to eliminate fear as a motivating factor of behavior while we are yet on the cusp of Global Warming - in fact, it might actually prove entirely counter productive.

.

This entire discussion really is absurd, when you consider the size of the human population, and the fact that there is no evidence in nature of any human group operating as you describe. It has never been, it is unlikely that it ever will be, and even if it could be, current circumstances make its development highly problematic and quite possibly detrimental to the prospects of survivability of the species.

We are not self motivated organizers and never have been.

Given that fact, it seems your advocacy plays directly into the hands of deregulationist repelican scum - the source of most of our problems today.

[-] 2 points by Freedomfeen (9) 4 months ago

I never said we would dispense of conflict in a voluntaryist society. a voluntaryist society would not be some utopia it would just be a place where NO ONE has an exception to morality just because they have a costume on. Its precisely BECAUSE people have the potential to be bad that there should not be a monopoly of authority for the thugs, bullies and scumbags to utilize to oppress everyone else. SEE COPS

Again, voluntaryism has nothing to do with nihilism.

We don't need to eliminate fear to establish a voluntary society. A voluntary society is already here. When you live your life you interact with everyone you meet on a voluntary basis, you shop voluntarily, you go to work voluntarily, you drive voluntarily. All the people providing you goods and services do so voluntarily. Anarchy is all around us, the only evidence it is not is in the statists who initiate force. Most everyone else does not go around constantly aggressing against others.

I don't see what a rich guy deciding to build giant walls on his property has to do with anything. As long as he does not point his guns at you or damage you or your property why do you care?

We constantly live in anarchy, the state is not omnipresent, it only swoops in after someone has been beaten or robbed and takes pictures. It swoops in on toyota and says: "people died because of your accelorators, therefore give us billions." Nevermind giving that money to the families, there is no reason for the state to have it. It swoops in on file sharers, drug users, gays, black people, people who want to keep what they earn and others who have harmed NOONE else and initaties violence against them-caging or killing them. The state is worse than useless, it causes harm on a massive scale.

Not everyone has to be self motivate organizers. There will always be people who will want to earn a profit by providing a service. In the absense of the state, car washes, grocery stores and malls do not suddenly stop working.

The source of most problems today is the initiation of force and the moral exception granted to the state to initiate force. This is the foundational principle of the republicans and democrats. There is no difference between republicans and democrats, all elections are a future auction for stolen goods.

Regulation does nothing to protect us, look what a wonderful job it did in the financial industry in the past few years-what a joke. Ever heard of regulatory capture?

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago
  • A voluntary society is already here. *

bullshit - and you know that's bullshit. there must be over a million different examples of why that is bullshit and you know it.

[-] 1 points by Freedomfeen (9) 4 months ago

Just calling something bullshit does not prove anything. I live my life without aggressing against anyones' life or property EVERY day. So do all my friends and people I associate with. In fact, I do not associate with people who do, such as two people I knew who decided to become slave catcher cops.

If the state went away tomorrow, there would be some people that would go crazy and think they could do anything, but this would be short term until they discovered that there are consequences for their actions. Until competing private security companies like the extremely successful Detroit Threat Management could be up and running. I think what we will see in the future is private business men and women stepping up to fill the roles the state used to do because the state will become more and more financially screwed, socially irrelevant and oppressive and people will want to have a voluntary choice of who will protect them or resolve disputes instead of being forced to chose the criminal gang to protect them. When mafias take over an area the immediately demand a portion of the income in return for protection, thats the same MO as governments, coincidence? I think not.

Please describe when you used force or fraud in the last month to get what you needed or wanted in the marketplace.

Now if you are saying involuntarily paying taxes means I am responsible for the death of babies in afghanistan, i would disagree with you. Or that because I consume resources I am someone committing aggression, again I would disagree with you.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago
  • I think what we will see in the future is private business men and women stepping up to fill the roles the state used to do because the state will become more and more financially screwed, socially irrelevant and oppressive and . . .*

so you really are a deluded paulite libertarian fool. The Koch Machine is FULL of private business people anxious to exploit your lame ass.

This kind of exploitation is exactly what regulatory capture is really all about.

this whole thing is all about who will be king - is it the public, via our representative form of governance? Or will it be someone like the Koch brothers?

If the later then we really will be screwed, and the only way to set it right will be with massive amounts of outright blood shed, something you profess to abhor . . .

[-] 1 points by Freedomfeen (9) 4 months ago

I address all of your criticisms EVERY TIME but you never address ANY of mine.

  • I am not a deluded paulite libertarian fool. I am an anarchist. I dont follow "great men". Ron paul was a politician I am an anarchist. These things are opposed to each other. Don't call names.

  • The kochs of the world got where they are by using the power of the state to achieve an unfair advantage in the market. The last thing they want is the market opened to all comers, their patents rendered powerless to stop copy cats, their competitors no longer needing to conform to the regulators they paid off to enforce laws that benefit them and hurt their competition. The last thing they want is a free market. It seems to me that when liberal statists have nothing to say to voluntaryists they just scream KOCH KOCH KOCH.

  • The whole thing is NOT about who will be king. The idea that the public is somehow king right now is completely laughable. Do you really think politicians represent you? If you think politicians represent you or the public, I have a nice bridge i just built that you may be interested in purchasing at a low price. Even if we assume a politican represented you-which they obviously do not-the idea of stealing from people and using violence to force your will on them is repulsive and gross. We do not need kings/presidents and we do not need "representative" politicians.

  • No one is talking about bloodshed. We can set it right by rendering centralized power structures irrelvant and outdated by using new decentralized and distributed technlogies like blockchains and 3d printers. New amazing decentralized tech is coming in the next few years. Bloodshed was the old way, we are much smarter now.

Do you read my responses to you? I would guess no since you don't answer them or my questions but just go off on your own tangents.

If you support the state then you support PUTTING me in a cage for disagreeing with you. That doesn't seem very enlightened. If i refuse to consent to the demands of your illegitimate and non-representative politicans what will happen to me? The states goons will use violence against me.

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

That doesn't seem very enlightened. If i refuse to consent to the demands of your illegitimate and non-representative politicans what will happen to me? The states goons will use violence against me.

Yes, I have been reading what you have posted. It just doesn't fit reality. It is because it simply does not fit reality that I suspect you of being a closet Paulite. There is an alternative explanation, one that demands the full measure of compassion available. The alternative possibilities combined with their opposing demands can be a bit confusing. In truth I'm not sure that the alternatives are really all that different, for surely all repelican leaders and policy shapers are insane, it must be so, to deny the fact of Global Warming despite the evidence.

And no, I do not believe that it is either right or just to use the states goons against you simply on the basis of your opinion. Any legitimate ruling body must facilitate the presentation of dissent if it is to maintain: a) a credible claim on power, b) the authority to dispense justice, c) keep tabs on the potential growth of corruption within the ranks of those who rule.

What we see today is the result of corruption insufficiently checked such that safeguards once in place and designed to preserve various components of our society - like our economy - from the influence of corruption have been tossed by the wayside.

In my view it will be difficult - if not impossible - to return to those safe guards while the main expression of social discontent seems to echo the very platform of those who have so successfully broken our economy in the first place.

Somehow I doubt that the source of my frustration is in any way any clearer to you . . . perhaps we should just drop it right here, I think we have reached the limits of my capacity for civility.

[-] 1 points by Freedomfeen (9) 4 months ago

I don't deny global warming, I realize it is real due to the scientific evidence. The story from a few years back of those global warming scientists colluding and manipulating via email did not help the case though and gave argumentative ammunition to the deniers.

I'm having a great convo with you! I appreciate your civility.

I would argue that those safeguards will always be corrupted in a monopolistic structure.

Seems like the source of your frustration is corporations. I also think corporations suck which is why i support removing their artificial crutches provided by the state: bailouts, regulations, regulatory capture, patents, IP law, collusion and back scratching, fascism, etc. The only way to do that is to remove the state since they will corrupt any centralized power structure.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

the best hope for humanity in the face of global warming is the state - it is only via a social organization like the state that we can hope to organize the resources necessary to provide for the survival of humanity.

I realize that such a statement must certainly seem bizarre in your mind given that to date the state itself - its agents and representatives - has in some measure helped facilitate denial of global warming as a simple matter of fact.

And yet I say that in 5000 years humanity has yet to develop any form of organization framework that is superior to that of the state in terms of providing for national defense, whether that defense is a response to natural disaster or foreign aggression.

[-] 3 points by JGriff99mph (507) 4 months ago

RB said "In reality we have much more in common with the people we are bombing than the people we are bombing them for"...

You may find that true with yourself and many others you think are the problem while endorsing others you think are your allies.

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

what is it about

wall street wants deregulation

repelicans scream deregulation

do you not understand?

piss off

[-] 3 points by JGriff99mph (507) 4 months ago

The more you empower the state the worse it gets, its a direct correlation.

If the people are controlled in their views and their education, how are they ever going to figure out how to fix it?

It only seems cleaner and healthier here now because they have us to the point where we are dumb enough to "elect" politicians via the state's system that ship our jobs overseas.

Unfortunately pollution in the atmosphere doesn't care where it originates, it fils the sphere regardless. Less visible to us, but hey, that doesn't stop people clamoring for more state... WE NEED MORE STATE!!

A globalist, centrally controlling body that is running the entire planet, pillaging it. That is what you guys are vouching for.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

A globalist, centrally controlling body that is running the entire planet, pillaging it. That is what you guys are vouching for.

Don't be so fuking dense. And no, I won't cut you the same slack. In 5000 years humanity has yet to devise a better method of organizing its resources to confront threats to community survival than the state.

Today actors from among the private sector do all in their power to either: a) limit the power of government to influence their bottom line, or b) harness that power to improve their bottom line - and while it is certainly true that either instance absolutely demands better curbs than presently exist, it is not true that either can justify - as some from the private sector do demand specifically for the purpose of improving their bottom line at public expense - the elimination of government.

it's a counter productive pipe dream, one that serves only those that would exploit our common resources without hindrance of any kind. Not from the EPA or anyone else.

fuk you

ya libertarian whore

.


.

THERE ARE NO FREE MARKETS

.

[-] 3 points by JGriff99mph (507) 4 months ago

Well there have traditionally always been psychopaths attempting to horde power, so we are currently trained to look to these very psychos for advice.

We don't need them. To state that we do is simply holding humanity back.

I realize you have lived your whole life under a type of system, and to think it has all been a lie must be very hard to grasp. Especially when you are actively participating in it, such as phone banking for people who are bombing africa. But its a reality we have to face.

Old dogs rarely learn new tricks, but it is possible.

[-] 2 points by JGriff99mph (507) 4 months ago

You are confusing decentralization with deregulation again.

Would we have some deregualtion with decentralization? Hell yes.

Would we have these huge conglomerates running the nation via power they garner from other centralized power in DC or state capitals? No.

And I realize that some make the arguement that the only way to combat these huge multinationals is with a strong federal government. But the problem is that they are never separate. They always feed each other.

If you take away the control of the monetary policy, the ability to wage war for resources, the ability to make large, sweeping regulations across the entire land, this all becomes much more unlikely.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

fuk you ya lyin libertarian scumbag

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 4 months ago

That'd be a good argument for struggleforfreedom to hear, about organizing resources to confront all kinds of threats to survival. You should pipe in on the alternative to capitalism thread. I tried pointing out a functionality of the military and it was pretty much ignored, only once did sff hint that the military should be decentralized as well (you've got to be kidding). Could use some backup because they have multiple accounts to manipulate voting, not that it matters, but it really does matter, psychologically.

[-] 1 points by JGriff99mph (507) 4 months ago

And yes we all know there are no 100% free markets. Just as there is no 100% freedom - your rights to your fists stop where my face starts- But there doesnt have to be centrally controlled by Wallst markets either. Its a struggle to fight for, just as it is a struggle for rights and decency.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13719) from South Burlington, VT 4 months ago

you can't have it both ways. The people of wall street insist on less government regulation. Here you suggest the same fuking thing

you must really be fuking stupid

[-] -1 points by friedmanmises (-78) 4 months ago

That is capitalism. I like what you're saying (A LOT, by the way), but I disagree with OWS. I came here to convert or be converted. You are an anarcho-capitalist. You favor a voluntary society based on free markets and competition. Your ideas are against OWS. While you're not a conservative, you're pointed in the same direction as they are (in fact, they are closer to OWS than you are). You love capitalism and free markets, and hate large government and regulations passed by corporations to kill small business competition.