The abolishment of Government bodies is required to be truly free, as government bodies dictate the lives of the citizens.

Where do the government Jobs go?
Government Jobs go to privately owned competing companies. The competing companies will strive for low prices to win over more costumers.

What about Money?
There will be several money printing companies each prints their own bills and coins. The more rare the bills and coins the more it is worth. Hence the companies strive to make only a limited amount of bills. These bills will be used to pay the workers who will in turn put the bills into circulation. The owner of the printing company will not keep bills to himself as it would then be worth less. and the workers will leave. The owner of the Press will get money from other presses in exchange for his money.

What about Police and Judges?
A set of Laws will be made agreed upon by each Town or district in the cases of cities. No law can be added without 100% consent. After the laws are set up privet police companies will be set up and paid by the person who was wronged, and without jurisdiction the police will catch the suspect and they will go to a court chosen by the person who was wronged. The courts will have a review system so the ones who were wronged could choose a court they like best. The expenses of the court will be paid by the convicted, as well as paying back the wronged for the police expenses.
If sentenced to a jail the convicted will than go to a jail of the judge’s choosing and will do manual labor till the debt to society is paid off. The manual Labor will pay for the privately owned jails

What about Property?
Everyone has their own privet property they claim, if not already owned. They claim it by buying a deed from various privately owned deed merchants who will check the property status and then write up a deed for you. These deed merchants share a common database library of all deeds shorted by location.
You may also buy property for the price the property owner asks.

What about a military?
The military is made up of militias who have other jobs as well. These militia will spend their free time training or with family. They never wage war, but rather defend against an attack. They never attack 1st, or interfere in other’s wars.

Any other questions I will be happy to answer

sounds like your making your dream nation ripe for invasion and occupation there.

Not to mention that Police system is completely untenable.

As an (apparently) fellow anarchist, please do your homework, and come back with better spelling and more importantly, a more developed view of anarchy. You shouldn't expect your system to magically work perfectly - that's for the communists. Furthermore, I think your (extremely) rough draft doesn't really go far enough. You've only really broken down the state from a national level into a city and town level. While that would probably still be better for individual liberty than the existing structure, you're pulling your punches.


Yes, this is exactly the thread to judge market anarchism by.

This is why I prefer leftist anarchism.

You did not hear me when I said I need you to help me work on it, hence community...... don't just say it sucks give advise on how to make it better otherwise your no better than the tards on youtube who say bad !@#$ just to say it


Oh and maybe you need to learn to read because that time I used spell check !!!! microsoft word 2007!!! and it said everything was right and I went over it agian!!! so you are just looking for a reason to insult people!!!!!!!

I fear competing companies for the nation's military.


A non-unified currency system in early America sucked hard for the country. Having individual companies do whatever they want will be one hundred times worse.


Yeah, tell me how that 100% consent goes.


Without a government to mandate all of this, how do you expect it to happen?


And who regulates the common database library?

you said privet about 20 times, its private.

The legal system sounds like I could declare myself to be a court and then punish people who wrong me under the "100% agreed upon laws" however I like

Government free? I think you have one lol.

Not only does spellcheck not catch many grammatical errors, but you have at least one case of using the wrong word due to a misspelling (privet instead of private). Furthermore, the large font size and the lack of capitalized letters at the beginning of a sentence make it hard to take you seriously. So there's some constructive criticism right off the bat.


For starters, you should go over some Rothbard, probably the best-known market anarchist. I'll go digging later (maybe, lotta work right now) for a pdf I think I was linked to by Rich333 that outlined some aspects of a market anarchist society but can't seem to find on my computer.

And I did give you some (general) criticism in my post. Cutting government down to the city level is still government, unless you could reach 100% consent on some laws which strikes me as unlikely. Your policing and legal system is a weird mix of things I've seen proposed by anarchists and aspects of how things are currently run. Additionally, a formal militia system will probably not develop in an anarchist society unless it is actual threatened by outside forces, and would still be better served with private defense solutions.


Since contractors are providing the majority of personnel in A-stan I think we're already passed that, no?


Source?

It also sounds like:
If you can't afford to hire a police force you're screwed -- it'd also paint a massive target on your back.
Petty crime that cost the owner less than they'd make from the hiring of the police would skyrocket.
If you're murdered and no one survives you to pay for an investigation, the murderer gets off free.
The police, operating on the profit motive, would never investigate/arrest the rich, who could pay them a higher fee.
The police, being a private company and operating on the profit motive, would either have no right (and thus ability) to properly investigate businesses, or would quickly switch half their operation to industrial espionage.
You can ensure that anyone is sent to prison by blaming them for something and then going to a court that you know will provide the desirable result.
Etc. etc. etc.

Market anarchism (though not the term I would use, necessarily, as it is rather vague) is socialist and therefore I, at least, will accept it as proper anarchism.

The difference between an anarchist system w/ a market and a capitalist system is that the former abolishes wage-slavery (which is, of course, the basis of the latter). Wage-slavery requires authority in order to exist, as a person does not voluntarily become a slave. Thus, "anarchist capitalism" is by definition a contradiction.



Irony: not only is your grammar way off, but you misspelt "again."

I have a question:

Why are you posting?

i completely volunteered to work at mcdonalds in high school for minimum wage.


your whole wage slavery argument is that we do not agree, well guess what we do! I do, I could find another job, i could be a subsistence farmer, i could get out of the system (many people do), i choose to work hard and succeed.

I try and get as much money as I can but ultimately I take a job I think i'm fairly paid for.


So no, don't lump me in with this wage-slavery idea.

If this thread is going to make it, we're going to need to take a break from the how-do-you-define-anarchism football and just accept that for this thread, anarchism is referring to a stateless society that allows individuals or collective groups to own the means of production, permitting (but not requiring) a wage system, though hopefully without special privileges for companies and corporations such as those currently granted by the state.

Now that is stretching it.... I never said they don't need to go to law school.........

Also within the laws agreed apon by the community there will be regulations



On top of Which those comunities will be small..... about the size of a town hall meeting....... and only the people who show up get to vote because the others could care less if they won't even show up (which happens allot with the US elections to begin with)


And of course I use private allot I also use companies allot prive owned companies as in citizen owned, not owned by the government........ own by citizens....... not a capitalist federation


Hence "Privet Owned "


Once agian Learn to read!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you are going to comment on how bad it is don't skim it READ It

you people just look for a reason to put down people..... because if you wasn't looking for reasons you wouldn't comment without reading it!!!!!!!..............


The 1st post was spelled right you claimmed it ws not,

You pointed out something wrong, but it corrects that problem in another section

You point out single words you see pop out allot but you don't know why it is there

you guys just look for reasons!!!!!!!!

Thats why I don't spelll check because you don't read it anyways!!!!!! If someone on the Forums actually reads my post maybe I would spelll check, but seeing as you people don't read it you just insult it without knowing what it actually says, I don't think I will use spell check on these forums

I actually read the whole thing and am a libertarian, you are ignoring AJ's rightful criticism that you are just mixing current government but on a more local level.


And you spelled private right once in this post i'm quoting and then reverted back to privet.

It is not always socialist there are diffrent forms left and right wing...... you obviously don't know much of the subject.......... some forms believe in common ownership, others as I just noted believes in private ownership........ of both self and land...


socialism is a bad way to go because it leads to communism and facism....... but the other direction is good, where the people is free to have private ownership of homes, and land.......

privet owned?

is that like a hedge fund?

hmmmm lets see because when I don't you still go on and on about what I said......... The deal works both ways I stop posting polpolitical views (which I thought was something allowed in this thread) and you stop talking about me behind my back

I'm not just going to roll over while you liberals take over the damb internet to with your damb censorship and remarks about offensivness when you people are the most offensive

http://images.google.com/images?rlz=1C1CHM...l=en&tab=wi

you don't get mocked because of your views. You get mocked because you are really horrible at posting. really horrible.

I don't mean to be rude or a grammar Nazi, but I seriously couldn't get through this what with all the blatant spelling/grammar problems. I'd read a sentence only to get caught on a few words spelled wrong or used incorrect, causing me to lose track of the OP's train of thought.

(that was the joke, yes)

Do you mean some socialist policies (or rather policies that could be considered socialist) or a government claiming to be socialist?
As a self confessed facist (a nice one though) I don't mind a few certain socialist ideas.

how old are you???????? you act like you are still in middle school..........


So I got 2 words switched...... is it my fualt I grew up in florida where the school systems are corrupt and the teachers only teach what is on the state tests and not what you really need to know,??? the stupid florida teachers get paid by the testing scores...... another reason florida sucks

Communism branched from socialism, and the natzi party is a form of national socialism............... Socialism is bad.... it is condeming

you sure are whiny. Do you consider anything to be your own fault, or do you blame all your failings on others?

Cowboy up, man. Wipe away the tears and take personal responsibility.

(I think you missed the joke, Maine - or worse, you're spoiling it for someone! )

cooltoye, to be frank, your posts do not meet the level of quality necessary to have a good discussion in the Boiler Room. Besides your spelling, grammar, and text stylings, you are actively ignoring points people are trying to make, and attacking points people are not making. Finally, you assume that we're all "damb liberals" when you get frustrated with our attempts to elevate your discourse. Unfortunately for you, most of us aren't damb liberals. We're a mix of classical liberal-style libertarians, socialists, some social democrats, some socialist anarchists and I think two or three anarcho capitalists.

Oh boy, where to begin...

I can already tell this is going to be fun because most market anarchists place even more faith in an idealized version of their chosen system's functioning than do most social anarchists, and that's saying something.


Ok, this will not work as written. If you want to set up a functioning, privatized monetary system, you need to throw out what you know about current state-regulated currency and back up a few steps in commercial development. Our current currency have value because it's backed by the US Government. Nobody is going to put any faith in money whose only value is derived from the backing of a private institution that has a significantly greater risk of collapsing than the US Government does. Just look at the effect the recession has had on the value of the dollar and imagine that writ a thousand-fold as printing companies expand and go bust and investing in a privatized denomination would be an absolutely horrible idea. Try and watch things fall back into a barter economy faster than you can blink.

If you want to privatize currency, you need to start with a base that everyone agrees has worth and work from there. Traditionally, western society has used gold, though you can pretty much use anything that has a widely acknowledged value. You then set up private banks in which people can store their gold and which can then issue bank notes which can act as a form of paper currency. With no regulation, this can develop some serious issues, but unlike your proposal, it should at least function on some level.


Ok, first:


That's called government. Your proposal is no longer a market anarchy if this is a part of it. It's also not even a particularly well-design government from a functional standpoint.

Now, ignoring that and moving on... There are still tons of problems with this system. First, who pays the police to go after people who kill homeless drifters? Or do we just not care about them? Secondly, what happens if the police don't catch the perpetrator? Does the person who was wronged have to pay out of pocket for the service? What if they can't afford to pay? Do they not receive protection from crime? If the police aren't paid if they don't catch the criminal, doesn't this lead to the extreme abuse whereby the police will arrest someone just to cover their costs whether they actually did it or not? If prisons are making money off the labor of prisoners, wouldn't they pay judges to send people their way, leading to a higher conviction rate regardless of evidence? We've had problems with that current privatized prison institutions, how would we deal with that problem if there is no authority to stop it?


I'm going to assume that by property you mean land. This confused me initially since property in these contexts is generally used in a much broader sense. First of all, where does this database come from? What if a deed merchant decides to set up his own practice and ignore the common database, attracting customers by allowing them to buy properties already owned by someone else according to the other database? What's to stop a merchant with access to the database from simply assigning himself all of the unclaimed land? In fact, this is what would almost certainly happen.


Why won't they ever attack first or interfere in others' wars? Who is going to organize these militias? Is it purely a volunteer based system? Why would someone volunteer for something they get no compensation for when they could spend that time working and making more money? People who don't take time out to volunteer in the militia would be able to out compete those who do in their respective markets. It would be more advantageous not to participate as long as someone else is doing it, and anyone who does do it will be at a disadvantage compared to those who are receiving protection from the militia but not participating in it.


How about environmental issues, scientific research and infrastructure such as roadways just for starters?

100% consent? That's never going to happen. There are people in the world who still think the Earth is flat for Christ's sake. good luck getting them to agree on complex legal definitions.

Could you explain some more why socialism is bad? Really I'm interested.

Ok, now having passed the OP, are you serious or is this a joke thread?

Don't worry about it. He'll just show up again in a couple days and reiterate the same wage-slavery garbage.

As for the OP, lol, and as for Renolds, who's still living in the 19th century?

it's both. He's serious, and this is a joke of a thread.

Worst. Idea. Ever. Not only is it pretty much impossible to attain 100% consent (if a group of rapists don't consent to a rape law, that means you can't add the law). Plus, if you have to pay for justice, people with more money can buy more justice.

I'll be honest here, I like nutcracking some of you guys here sometimes It really is funny, but I enjoy all of your points of view I read them even if i think they are crap.

That being said, for any serious attempt for a "True anarchy scenario" here in the boiler room, it cant be taken seriously without Arcturus Jefferson being complicit in its architecture, or fully endorsing it.

If in need of clarification read this:



The "quality level" assertion is the winner, I mean here in the boiler room there are standards afterall. Where else on the web can you go where posters attack your spelling as part of thier arguments?

also, as a single person's manual labor will not even come close to paying the cost for keeping them in jail, either the prison will run at a loss, or it will become a debtor's prison.

No, I think he's got it right. This is a rough draft of a true anarchy scenario.

Think about it: there are no laws (because nobody can agree on them), people appoint themselves judge, jury, and executioner, the entire financial system collapses due to a lack of a coherent monetary base, charismatic individuals will set up their own milita groups (think The Postman) to roam the countryside taking whatever they please, and everyone will be free (to be dominated by anyone more powerful).

He's hit the nail right on the head for why an anarchist society is not a functioning society. I think he should now post his primer for socialist, communist, and feudal societies so we can study why those don't function too.

I'm flattered, but I'd only be able to either cobble together something inferior out of better work, or outright steal something. From what I've read about actually implementing an anarchist society, there are some things that make a lot of sense to me, and other parts that don't. I guess you could say I'm an anarchist first for moral reasons and secondly for utilitarian reasons.

I think we could use a BR slogan: spell bad or make bad arguments, but please don't do both.


If you minarchists think you can control government, you're as crazy as us anarchists. But at least we don't compromise.

I appreciate it is a "rough draft", but you seem to ignore the only person that tried to have a legitimate discussion with you (Arcturus Jefferson) and just focused "allot" on people mocking your spelling and grammar.


All you need is to use a to make Lamuella's day.

Oh I don’t doubt your grasp on the reality of actually implementing it and I admire the caviler manner in which you hold the morals of anarchy despite that grasp on reality, it makes your posts very interesting to read even if I poke fun.

It was a genuine compliment, even if masked in the obligatory boiler room slights, jabs, misdirects and lack of civility.

For the people who do claim to be anarchists, do you actually do anything to further your cause (if so, what?) or is it just more of a political/moral position you have but do not actively act on? Just curious.

honestly, I don't think we're anything close to advanced enough to be capable of a true anarchist society yet. And by advanced enough I mean both technically and philosophically.

What changes do you think would have to happen in order to make it closer?

Courts that are empty due to lack of crime or disputes.

Tesla Force Fields that can be generated by a single household!

Force fields that can be generated by a single individual!

If I found that moderately detained outline of how an anarchist legal system could work, would you consider reading it instead of dismissing anarchy as a whole on childish strawmen?