3 ms·

>are you talking about literal anarchists...or just libertarians?" Probably less binary and anywhere along that continuum. That is, it's a question of degree w

>are you talking about literal anarchists...or just libertarians?" Probably less binary and anywhere along that continuum. That is, it's a question of degree wherein my concerns go up the closer things get to zero. It's difficult to discuss in earnest without somewhat painstakingly specific scenarios, but the gist of my comment was that as you shed government, its powers don't simply disappear; they're redistributed elsewhere. And, given that our government is (at least theoretically) by the people, we're really talking about relinquishing the power of the individual to corporations. Taking it back to the topic of this thread ("Amazon factory towns"), I believe that's essentially what the country would become—wholly owned by corporations. I don't believe in the concept of corporate personhood and I don't think corporations need more power, so I don't believe that's a good outcome.

jjk166 5y ago
There are lots of powers which if shed would not be picked up by somebody else. For example if you remove the government's ability to grant FISA warrants for wiretaps, that does not suddenly grant wiretapping powers to other entities. Shut down the EPA and no one gains the ability to regulate sulphur emissions. Shut down the FDA and no one gains the authority to stop drugs from going to market. Shut down the patent office and no one gains the ability to grant patents. There are cases where the government is actively limiting other entities abilities to abuse their powers. For example you want to restrict who a power company can shut off service to so they don't extort people in the middle of winter. Giving up the regulation of such utilities would simply be a power transfer (no pun intended). But this represents only a small fraction of the governments powers, and in general unregulated means exactly that.

jjk166 5y ago

There are lots of powers which if shed would not be picked up by somebody else. For example if you remove the government's ability to grant FISA warrants for wiretaps, that does not suddenly grant wiretapping powers to other entities. Shut down the EPA and no one gains the ability to regulate sulphur emissions. Shut down the FDA and no one gains the authority to stop drugs from going to market. Shut down the patent office and no one gains the ability to grant patents. There are cases where the government is actively limiting other entities abilities to abuse their powers. For example you want to restrict who a power company can shut off service to so they don't extort people in the middle of winter. Giving up the regulation of such utilities would simply be a power transfer (no pun intended). But this represents only a small fraction of the governments powers, and in general unregulated means exactly that.