3 ms·

if revoking consent to be governed isn't anarchy, what is it?

crawfordcomeaux 7y ago
A request for ad hoc processes to design a new process oriented toward better meeting needs? Example: today, I was in court to convert traffic fines to community service. I was then informed community service must be performed for a 501c.3 to be recognized by the court. Society and the government don't typically consider parenting or healing oneself physically/mentally/emotionally as something to be valued the same way as any paying job. Both take work and arebeneficial to society & the government, but people who help others accomplish those goals are currently paid/valued far more in capitalism. So, I'm starting a 501c.3 to validate time spent parenting, supporting parents, healing and supporting healing for legal community service. The board will likely be stacked with anarchists (initially) and may be required to demonstrate a willingness to operate as such. In the face of by-laws requirements, this may be tricky to codify. In any case, I see this as a way to starve the government of fines levied against people who fall into any of those categories (which can easily be met by anyone simply by hanging out with friends). Or at least I think it can apply to anyone. If I'm leaving anyone out, let's try to expand the mission to easily include them! So we starve the state together through forming a nonprofit while meeting human needs. It'd be nice if we could just say "This requirement doesn't meet my needs. Can we figure out another arrangement that doesn't require so much administrative overhead? I'm a full-time parent seeking to minimize the amount of time away from my child until I have broader solidaritous community support in my life." I can write more on this, as this idea spawned out of already-in-place thoughts on peacefully revoking consent to be governed (for Lent and for All). But first I'm going to eat, clean the living room, and meditate on the nonprofit more while my partner and child nap.
crawfordcomeaux 7y ago
Also, it's totally anarchy. Temporary anarchy. I view the rigid dedication to "one governance system at all times" is a cultural artifact of static thinking. Neuroplasticity and grown mindsets are a thing. The science of learning how to learn suggest we operate in a more fluid fashion. Same for cultural evolution. Let's redesign everything from these recent perspectives instead of clinging to ancient paradigms.
- ksdale 7y ago
  Thank you for your thoughtful comments! I think such a thing as temporary anarchy is almost impossible to achieve in practice. There is entropy in human organizations and it's much easier to break things than to build them. I believe if you make it too easy to break things, even if you have the best of intentions and intend to rebuild them, you will just end up with a lot of broken things. In my experience, people tend to drastically underestimate how difficult it is to build things. I read your comment below, and I really like what you said about parenting and healing, by the way. I also think that learning to create things together without the permission of governments or corporations is something that we would all benefit from very much. I'm not sure it's necessary to throw off the shackles of government to make a lot of real, concrete improvements in the way we live.
anigbrowl 7y ago
Going from the assertion that there's no way for a polity to revoke its consent to be governed (whereas in some states elected officials are subject to recall via the ballot box) does not translate to 'anyone can decide not to be governed.' If it was a misunderstanding then OK, but I can't understand why you'd interpret a broad comment about the design of the federal government as a proposal for unilateral individual sovereignty.

A request for ad hoc processes to design a new process oriented toward better meeting needs? Example: today, I was in court to convert traffic fines to community service. I was then informed community service must be performed for a 501c.3 to be recognized by the court. Society and the government don't typically consider parenting or healing oneself physically/mentally/emotionally as something to be valued the same way as any paying job. Both take work and arebeneficial to society & the government, but people who help others accomplish those goals are currently paid/valued far more in capitalism. So, I'm starting a 501c.3 to validate time spent parenting, supporting parents, healing and supporting healing for legal community service. The board will likely be stacked with anarchists (initially) and may be required to demonstrate a willingness to operate as such. In the face of by-laws requirements, this may be tricky to codify. In any case, I see this as a way to starve the government of fines levied against people who fall into any of those categories (which can easily be met by anyone simply by hanging out with friends). Or at least I think it can apply to anyone. If I'm leaving anyone out, let's try to expand the mission to easily include them! So we starve the state together through forming a nonprofit while meeting human needs. It'd be nice if we could just say "This requirement doesn't meet my needs. Can we figure out another arrangement that doesn't require so much administrative overhead? I'm a full-time parent seeking to minimize the amount of time away from my child until I have broader solidaritous community support in my life." I can write more on this, as this idea spawned out of already-in-place thoughts on peacefully revoking consent to be governed (for Lent and for All). But first I'm going to eat, clean the living room, and meditate on the nonprofit more while my partner and child nap.

crawfordcomeaux 7y ago

Also, it's totally anarchy. Temporary anarchy. I view the rigid dedication to "one governance system at all times" is a cultural artifact of static thinking. Neuroplasticity and grown mindsets are a thing. The science of learning how to learn suggest we operate in a more fluid fashion. Same for cultural evolution. Let's redesign everything from these recent perspectives instead of clinging to ancient paradigms.

ksdale 7y ago
Thank you for your thoughtful comments! I think such a thing as temporary anarchy is almost impossible to achieve in practice. There is entropy in human organizations and it's much easier to break things than to build them. I believe if you make it too easy to break things, even if you have the best of intentions and intend to rebuild them, you will just end up with a lot of broken things. In my experience, people tend to drastically underestimate how difficult it is to build things. I read your comment below, and I really like what you said about parenting and healing, by the way. I also think that learning to create things together without the permission of governments or corporations is something that we would all benefit from very much. I'm not sure it's necessary to throw off the shackles of government to make a lot of real, concrete improvements in the way we live.

anigbrowl 7y ago

Going from the assertion that there's no way for a polity to revoke its consent to be governed (whereas in some states elected officials are subject to recall via the ballot box) does not translate to 'anyone can decide not to be governed.' If it was a misunderstanding then OK, but I can't understand why you'd interpret a broad comment about the design of the federal government as a proposal for unilateral individual sovereignty.