4 ms·

It's called anarchy-tyranny, where the government fails to enforce basic laws and keep people safe from real criminals (anarchy), but instead uses its power to

It's called anarchy-tyranny, where the government fails to enforce basic laws and keep people safe from real criminals (anarchy), but instead uses its power to tightly control, tax, and punish ordinary, law-abiding citizens (tyranny). There are various conspiratorial theories for why this happens but I think the simplest explanation is that an ineffective government cannot deal with criminals and goes after the easier and more compliant targets instead.

t0bia_s 2mo ago
Why anarchy = criminal?
- psd1 2mo ago
  "Anarchy" in that phrase is fucking wrong. Unsophisticated people assume that anarchy means "no rules", which is false. It means no rulers, not no rules. (More precisely, it means no non-rulers.) A better term would be "warlordism", if you want to emphasise the lawlessness of the financial class, or maybe "feudalism" to emphasise that the financial class and the political class are congruent.
  - account42 2mo ago
    Criminal organizations also have rules.
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    Anarchy means "without government" or "without rulers". Seems fine to emphasize the government isn't acting like one.
    - psd1 2mo ago
      That's a calumny. Anarchy is not what you end up with when government becomes febrile and vapid - that would be warlordism. I'll give you a gold star for deconstructing the word roots, but "anarchy" is a term of art. The salient distinction is that society hasn't abolished rulers - it has merely replaced political rulers with corporate rulers. Actual anarchy is hard fucking work. It's sustainable in small communities, but you have to sit through meetings where idiots ramble about some stupid shit that is important only to them. It is a prosocial form of government predicated on empowered consensus - which is to say, predicated on bickering. This requires far more from participants than warlordism, where all you have to do is obey the one with the biggest stick. Anarchy devolves into shittier systems if the community fails to maintain it. It's a high-energy state. Warlordism doesn't devolve; it's the lowest-energy state. Government by primate dominance. Letting Google and Facebook run your society is not anarchy, it's techno-warlordism. "Techno-feudalism" is less accurate, but broadly understood.
- slopinthebag 2mo ago
  Anarchy has multiple definitions, on of which is lawless and violence and chaos.
  - t0bia_s 2mo ago
    Anarchy is from Greek term an archos, which means without ruler. We live on society where having rulers is obvious and assumes that we are unable organize ourselves. If you say anarchy means chaos, then democracy means lack of personal responsibility.
inigyou 2mo ago
Why don't we all become criminals then? Seems easier. I'll start: here's a VPN you can connect to to access porn sites.
jonfromsf 2mo ago
Yes. Anacho-tyranny sounds very conspiratorial, but if you think from the police perspective, it is 1000X times easier to enforce fines and codes on the middle class and shopkeepers then it is to arrest criminals. Having an effective police force means cracking that motivation problem, and it's a sign of a well-aligned and well-functioning society. We aren't one.

t0bia_s 2mo ago

Why anarchy = criminal?

psd1 2mo ago
"Anarchy" in that phrase is fucking wrong. Unsophisticated people assume that anarchy means "no rules", which is false. It means no rulers, not no rules. (More precisely, it means no non-rulers.) A better term would be "warlordism", if you want to emphasise the lawlessness of the financial class, or maybe "feudalism" to emphasise that the financial class and the political class are congruent.
- account42 2mo ago
  Criminal organizations also have rules.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  Anarchy means "without government" or "without rulers". Seems fine to emphasize the government isn't acting like one.
  - psd1 2mo ago
    That's a calumny. Anarchy is not what you end up with when government becomes febrile and vapid - that would be warlordism. I'll give you a gold star for deconstructing the word roots, but "anarchy" is a term of art. The salient distinction is that society hasn't abolished rulers - it has merely replaced political rulers with corporate rulers. Actual anarchy is hard fucking work. It's sustainable in small communities, but you have to sit through meetings where idiots ramble about some stupid shit that is important only to them. It is a prosocial form of government predicated on empowered consensus - which is to say, predicated on bickering. This requires far more from participants than warlordism, where all you have to do is obey the one with the biggest stick. Anarchy devolves into shittier systems if the community fails to maintain it. It's a high-energy state. Warlordism doesn't devolve; it's the lowest-energy state. Government by primate dominance. Letting Google and Facebook run your society is not anarchy, it's techno-warlordism. "Techno-feudalism" is less accurate, but broadly understood.
slopinthebag 2mo ago
Anarchy has multiple definitions, on of which is lawless and violence and chaos.
- t0bia_s 2mo ago
  Anarchy is from Greek term an archos, which means without ruler. We live on society where having rulers is obvious and assumes that we are unable organize ourselves. If you say anarchy means chaos, then democracy means lack of personal responsibility.

inigyou 2mo ago

Why don't we all become criminals then? Seems easier. I'll start: here's a VPN you can connect to to access porn sites.

jonfromsf 2mo ago

Yes. Anacho-tyranny sounds very conspiratorial, but if you think from the police perspective, it is 1000X times easier to enforce fines and codes on the middle class and shopkeepers then it is to arrest criminals. Having an effective police force means cracking that motivation problem, and it's a sign of a well-aligned and well-functioning society. We aren't one.