5 ms·

The licence prohibits Law Enforcement use. What does that have to do with Capitalism? I'm fairly sure every socialist/communist/facist country has some form of

by bb123 6y ago

The licence prohibits Law Enforcement use. What does that have to do with Capitalism? I'm fairly sure every socialist/communist/facist country has some form of law enforcement.

colesantiago 6y ago
Laws and borders are just a social construct, we don't really need them. Even if we do, the community can govern themselves.
- bb123 6y ago
  Ah yes, countries like Somalia do so well without a system of functioning government and laws. With the added benefit of no taxes! But you might have to pay protection money to your local warlord so YMMV.
- nailer 6y ago
  Yes we've recently been reminded of how well this works with CHAZ/CHOP.
  - colesantiago 6y ago
    CHAZ/CHOP actually succeeded by being formed by the people but as always the police ruined it and dismantled it. It would have been entirely different had they not got involved.
    - nailer 6y ago
      That's not correct. The deaths, assaults and racial segregation occurred without the involvement of police.
  - kevingadd 6y ago
    CHAZ/CHOP is a horrible example since most of the discourse about it is based on falsehoods and exaggerations, and it existed in a state of constant conflict with local law enforcement. There were certainly many good things about it, but I'm not sure you can learn much from it in the grand scope of things other than "it won't work out well, because most forces don't want it to exist". There are definitely examples out there of more successful self-governance, though.
- ryanbrunner 6y ago
  When the community elects to police itself, if someone volunteers to watch a neighbourhood for a night are they considered law enforcement? If not, why? I recognize there's a difference but this license makes no effort to distinguish between those two things. And if your starting point for why a term of a license is "we don't need laws", what exactly is the point of having a license anyway?
  - colesantiago 6y ago
    > When the community elects to police itself, if someone volunteers to watch a neighbourhood for a night are they considered law enforcement? It is 'community enforcement', they volunteered didn't they, it's not by force, by state, or are being paid to do it.
    - ryanbrunner 6y ago
      Sure, that's fine - my point is that a blanket "you can't be law enforcement" doesn't make this distinction. If you want to include something like that in your license, you need to be a lot more clear about what "law enforcement" entails. Right now it makes no mention of whether it's speaking about professional law enforcement, state-operated law enforcement, or anything like that.
  - guerrilla 6y ago
    > When the community elects to police itself, if someone volunteers to watch a neighbourhood for a night are they considered law enforcement? If not, why? The difference would be that they would be chosen from the community by the community, not external to it and chosen by external actors. > "we don't need laws" This confounds laws with law enforcement. The concepts you're missing are consent and cooperation.
    - ryanbrunner 6y ago
      > This confounds laws with law enforcement. The concepts you're missing are consent and cooperation. I'm not the one making the claim that laws are a social construct and we don't need them.
- logarhythmic 6y ago
  Just curious as to where this has ever actually worked out well?
  - guerrilla 6y ago
    Chiapas is a good example. Here's a list [1] of others. [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- dx87 6y ago
  That worked so well with CHAZ/CHOP...
  - colesantiago 6y ago
    Yes it did, CHAZ/CHOP was the stepping stone for a zone controlled by the people, until the totalitarian police got involved that it was unfortunately destroyed.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- HissingMachine 6y ago
  Good luck and have fun enforcing this software license without the social construct of law enforcement and judiciary.

by bb123 6y ago

The licence prohibits Law Enforcement use. What does that have to do with Capitalism? I'm fairly sure every socialist/communist/facist country has some form of law enforcement.

colesantiago 6y ago

Laws and borders are just a social construct, we don't really need them. Even if we do, the community can govern themselves.

bb123 6y ago
Ah yes, countries like Somalia do so well without a system of functioning government and laws. With the added benefit of no taxes! But you might have to pay protection money to your local warlord so YMMV.
nailer 6y ago
Yes we've recently been reminded of how well this works with CHAZ/CHOP.
- colesantiago 6y ago
  CHAZ/CHOP actually succeeded by being formed by the people but as always the police ruined it and dismantled it. It would have been entirely different had they not got involved.
  - nailer 6y ago
    That's not correct. The deaths, assaults and racial segregation occurred without the involvement of police.
- kevingadd 6y ago
  CHAZ/CHOP is a horrible example since most of the discourse about it is based on falsehoods and exaggerations, and it existed in a state of constant conflict with local law enforcement. There were certainly many good things about it, but I'm not sure you can learn much from it in the grand scope of things other than "it won't work out well, because most forces don't want it to exist". There are definitely examples out there of more successful self-governance, though.
ryanbrunner 6y ago
When the community elects to police itself, if someone volunteers to watch a neighbourhood for a night are they considered law enforcement? If not, why? I recognize there's a difference but this license makes no effort to distinguish between those two things. And if your starting point for why a term of a license is "we don't need laws", what exactly is the point of having a license anyway?
- colesantiago 6y ago
  > When the community elects to police itself, if someone volunteers to watch a neighbourhood for a night are they considered law enforcement? It is 'community enforcement', they volunteered didn't they, it's not by force, by state, or are being paid to do it.
  - ryanbrunner 6y ago
    Sure, that's fine - my point is that a blanket "you can't be law enforcement" doesn't make this distinction. If you want to include something like that in your license, you need to be a lot more clear about what "law enforcement" entails. Right now it makes no mention of whether it's speaking about professional law enforcement, state-operated law enforcement, or anything like that.
- guerrilla 6y ago
  > When the community elects to police itself, if someone volunteers to watch a neighbourhood for a night are they considered law enforcement? If not, why? The difference would be that they would be chosen from the community by the community, not external to it and chosen by external actors. > "we don't need laws" This confounds laws with law enforcement. The concepts you're missing are consent and cooperation.
  - ryanbrunner 6y ago
    > This confounds laws with law enforcement. The concepts you're missing are consent and cooperation. I'm not the one making the claim that laws are a social construct and we don't need them.
logarhythmic 6y ago
Just curious as to where this has ever actually worked out well?
- guerrilla 6y ago
  Chiapas is a good example. Here's a list [1] of others. [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
dx87 6y ago
That worked so well with CHAZ/CHOP...
- colesantiago 6y ago
  Yes it did, CHAZ/CHOP was the stepping stone for a zone controlled by the people, until the totalitarian police got involved that it was unfortunately destroyed.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
HissingMachine 6y ago
Good luck and have fun enforcing this software license without the social construct of law enforcement and judiciary.