3 ms·

I agree 100%, but it makes a mildly interesting jumping off point. My first question is: but what if they don't?

gghh 5mo ago
As the person who posted the quote, gonna be direct: no idea. I have to say, I don't identify myself as a anarchist (maybe a bit of a sympathizer), yet I'm middle aged and finding myself a little dissatisfied by many things I see around me, so if I see people making the equation anarchist = degenerate, my immediate reaction is "yeah let's slow it down shall we."
wccrawford 5mo ago
Exactly. Of course they're capable of it. That doesn't mean they will. They have a lot of incentives to behave badly, and there's no way to eliminate them all.
- hallole 5mo ago
  Even under our decidedly non-anarchic regime, people STILL find reasons to behave poorly. I can't imagine removing the disincentive of state punishment would benefit society very much.
  - rexpop 5mo ago
    > Even under our decidedly raging conflagration, people STILL find reasons to burn to a crisp. The argument—to which I'm quite sympathetic—is that these non-anarchic institutions perpetuate the environment which incentizes "bad behavior."
    - hallole 5mo ago
      By "bad behavior," I mean robbing and murdering and the like, so no need for scare-quotes. Framing the average criminal as the victim of their own circumstances -- which seems to really be in vogue -- is entirely unconvincing to me. > people STILL find reasons to burn to a crisp. You make it sound as if turning to crime is less the criminal's decision and moreso nature's.
      - joshuamorton 5mo ago
        While it doesn't explain 100% of crime, this is just true. You change people's circumstances such that crime isn't rational, and they're less likely to do it.
        charcircuit 5mo ago
        That would require a government to enforce such heavy lifestyle restrictions on people.
        arcxi 5mo ago
        it's heavy lifestyle restrictions that lead to anti-social behavior in the first place. by far the most common crime is property crime, people usually commit it out of desperation and lack of opportunity. the degree of personal freedom in a capitalist state is defined by wealth, which creates a natural incentive to steal. then when they do, those people are put in prison, where they connect with other labeled criminals, all of whom face significantly lower chances of being hired, making sure that doing anything else in their life except crime will be as difficult as possible. aren't those heavy lifestyle restrictions enforced on people by government?
        rexpop 5mo ago
        [dead]
        joshuamorton 5mo ago
        There is a reason that crime goes up a ton when existing tools for survival disappear (e.g. disaster scenarios). When people have paths to prosperity, the need to do crime goes down. When the marginal value of crime is low, people don't do it. You can get there with draconian punishments, but you can also get there with, like, a strong social safety net and general prosperity. While not the only reason, one reason that my coworkers won't steal my wallet if I leave it somewhere is that the $20 is mostly irrelevant to them given the general level of prosperity at my office.
        5mo ago

gghh 5mo ago

As the person who posted the quote, gonna be direct: no idea. I have to say, I don't identify myself as a anarchist (maybe a bit of a sympathizer), yet I'm middle aged and finding myself a little dissatisfied by many things I see around me, so if I see people making the equation anarchist = degenerate, my immediate reaction is "yeah let's slow it down shall we."

wccrawford 5mo ago

Exactly. Of course they're capable of it. That doesn't mean they will. They have a lot of incentives to behave badly, and there's no way to eliminate them all.

hallole 5mo ago
Even under our decidedly non-anarchic regime, people STILL find reasons to behave poorly. I can't imagine removing the disincentive of state punishment would benefit society very much.
- rexpop 5mo ago
  > Even under our decidedly raging conflagration, people STILL find reasons to burn to a crisp. The argument—to which I'm quite sympathetic—is that these non-anarchic institutions perpetuate the environment which incentizes "bad behavior."
  - hallole 5mo ago
    By "bad behavior," I mean robbing and murdering and the like, so no need for scare-quotes. Framing the average criminal as the victim of their own circumstances -- which seems to really be in vogue -- is entirely unconvincing to me. > people STILL find reasons to burn to a crisp. You make it sound as if turning to crime is less the criminal's decision and moreso nature's.
    - joshuamorton 5mo ago
      While it doesn't explain 100% of crime, this is just true. You change people's circumstances such that crime isn't rational, and they're less likely to do it.
      - charcircuit 5mo ago
        That would require a government to enforce such heavy lifestyle restrictions on people.
        arcxi 5mo ago
        it's heavy lifestyle restrictions that lead to anti-social behavior in the first place. by far the most common crime is property crime, people usually commit it out of desperation and lack of opportunity. the degree of personal freedom in a capitalist state is defined by wealth, which creates a natural incentive to steal. then when they do, those people are put in prison, where they connect with other labeled criminals, all of whom face significantly lower chances of being hired, making sure that doing anything else in their life except crime will be as difficult as possible. aren't those heavy lifestyle restrictions enforced on people by government?
        rexpop 5mo ago
        [dead]
        joshuamorton 5mo ago
        There is a reason that crime goes up a ton when existing tools for survival disappear (e.g. disaster scenarios). When people have paths to prosperity, the need to do crime goes down. When the marginal value of crime is low, people don't do it. You can get there with draconian punishments, but you can also get there with, like, a strong social safety net and general prosperity. While not the only reason, one reason that my coworkers won't steal my wallet if I leave it somewhere is that the $20 is mostly irrelevant to them given the general level of prosperity at my office.
        5mo ago