3 ms·

Russia in the 90s wasn't absence of government. It was a curious mix of government and bandits, which, of course, continued into our days. Except that now it's

by snitko 13y ago

Russia in the 90s wasn't absence of government. It was a curious mix of government and bandits, which, of course, continued into our days. Except that now it's actually much easier to identify the bad guys: they are wearing a uniform. But the point is, you can't just burn a church in a village and expect people to become atheists. Which is an analogy for what happened with the USSR. People got their freedom, but they had no idea what to do with it. So it was gradually taken back from them again.

p1esk 13y ago
People got their freedom, but they had no idea what to do with it. That's the truth right there. Vast majority of people already have more freedom than they know what to do with. Those people, if faced with a clear choice, would gladly trade some of that "freedom" for stability, security, and comfort in their lives. If you remove a government from a society, it will quickly descend into chaos. Various armed forces will longer be held accountable for their actions. What do you think will happen? Anyone with a gun can become a "government". Now instead of one government, you have a thousand. Eventually, power will consolidate, and you will end up with a single government, back where you started. I feel a bit strange having to explain these obvious things, it's like I'm talking to a 10 year old. Do you not realize that the societal order you're proposing has been tried many times since the beginning of civilization? It has never worked. Every time, some kind of power (official or unofficial) had emerged sooner or later (usually sooner), and eventually a some sort of a centralized government was formed. This happened every single time. If people could function without a government, surely we would have seen an example of that somewhere.
- snitko 13y ago
  It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere". The thing is, I realize a lot of people are not ready to be unplugged. That's fine. But there are a lot of people who share my views who would like to live without a government and who know how to do it. The problem for these people is that all the land is taken by states already. And, mind you, most of it is unused. It doesn't have to be some really good land, Las Vegas was built in the desert after all. I guarantee you, if such a land was made available, you would see an unprecedented migration of people and businesses into it and a huge economic boom. The reason it's not available is because states are mostly afraid that if they sell a piece of land to someone completely (that is, allow to secede) many more would follow.
  - p1esk 13y ago
    It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere" Ok, good point. The society without any government is possible in theory. It's possible that in the distant future, human civilization will evolve to some kind of government-free organization. However, you are claiming that it is possible today. Let's say we completely remove all people from California, restore it to its wild prehistoric state, and declare it a government-free zone. Anyone can move there and do whatever they like. No laws, no infrastructure, no social services, just wild nature. The blank slate. Let's say a lot of all kinds of people from all over the world will move there and will want to start a new life. Also, for the sake of the argument, let's say no outside influence will be exerted on that land, it will be allowed to develop independently. Please describe what is going to happen there in the next 100 years? What makes you think it will be different this time around than how it was 200 years ago?
    - snitko 13y ago
      Oh, no, I never said it's possible now. Or, to be precise, I never said it is possible at the current state of understanding of the world most people have. For most people, a state is like religion. If you burn a church in a village the villagers don't become atheists. My point is that there are people who understand liberty and understand how to build a free society. They would like an exit. The problem, in my view, is that those in power wouldn't allow them such an exit, because as soon as others see them succeed, the state would lose its legitimacy. You ask me, what is my solution to this? 1. Educate people about the evil and predatory nature of the state 2. Use Bitcoin. And that's all I have to say about the war in Vietnam.
      - p1esk 13y ago
        current state of understanding of the world most people have Your problem is you believe you understand the world better than others. You want to educate others, but even here on this forum, where people generally listen to reason, and are disillusioned with the government, you haven't persuaded anyone with your arguments. For me, a state is not a religion. For me government is a service, and I'm fine paying for that service. I'm fine trading some of my freedom for security, stability, and comfort. I still have plenty of freedom left. I honestly don't understand what are you complaining about. If you're living in Russia, and your life there sucks, just move to a country with a better government, with better laws, or with better whatever it is you're not happy about.

by snitko 13y ago

p1esk 13y ago

People got their freedom, but they had no idea what to do with it. That's the truth right there. Vast majority of people already have more freedom than they know what to do with. Those people, if faced with a clear choice, would gladly trade some of that "freedom" for stability, security, and comfort in their lives. If you remove a government from a society, it will quickly descend into chaos. Various armed forces will longer be held accountable for their actions. What do you think will happen? Anyone with a gun can become a "government". Now instead of one government, you have a thousand. Eventually, power will consolidate, and you will end up with a single government, back where you started. I feel a bit strange having to explain these obvious things, it's like I'm talking to a 10 year old. Do you not realize that the societal order you're proposing has been tried many times since the beginning of civilization? It has never worked. Every time, some kind of power (official or unofficial) had emerged sooner or later (usually sooner), and eventually a some sort of a centralized government was formed. This happened every single time. If people could function without a government, surely we would have seen an example of that somewhere.

snitko 13y ago
It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere". The thing is, I realize a lot of people are not ready to be unplugged. That's fine. But there are a lot of people who share my views who would like to live without a government and who know how to do it. The problem for these people is that all the land is taken by states already. And, mind you, most of it is unused. It doesn't have to be some really good land, Las Vegas was built in the desert after all. I guarantee you, if such a land was made available, you would see an unprecedented migration of people and businesses into it and a huge economic boom. The reason it's not available is because states are mostly afraid that if they sell a piece of land to someone completely (that is, allow to secede) many more would follow.
- p1esk 13y ago
  It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere" Ok, good point. The society without any government is possible in theory. It's possible that in the distant future, human civilization will evolve to some kind of government-free organization. However, you are claiming that it is possible today. Let's say we completely remove all people from California, restore it to its wild prehistoric state, and declare it a government-free zone. Anyone can move there and do whatever they like. No laws, no infrastructure, no social services, just wild nature. The blank slate. Let's say a lot of all kinds of people from all over the world will move there and will want to start a new life. Also, for the sake of the argument, let's say no outside influence will be exerted on that land, it will be allowed to develop independently. Please describe what is going to happen there in the next 100 years? What makes you think it will be different this time around than how it was 200 years ago?
  - snitko 13y ago
    Oh, no, I never said it's possible now. Or, to be precise, I never said it is possible at the current state of understanding of the world most people have. For most people, a state is like religion. If you burn a church in a village the villagers don't become atheists. My point is that there are people who understand liberty and understand how to build a free society. They would like an exit. The problem, in my view, is that those in power wouldn't allow them such an exit, because as soon as others see them succeed, the state would lose its legitimacy. You ask me, what is my solution to this? 1. Educate people about the evil and predatory nature of the state 2. Use Bitcoin. And that's all I have to say about the war in Vietnam.
    - p1esk 13y ago
      current state of understanding of the world most people have Your problem is you believe you understand the world better than others. You want to educate others, but even here on this forum, where people generally listen to reason, and are disillusioned with the government, you haven't persuaded anyone with your arguments. For me, a state is not a religion. For me government is a service, and I'm fine paying for that service. I'm fine trading some of my freedom for security, stability, and comfort. I still have plenty of freedom left. I honestly don't understand what are you complaining about. If you're living in Russia, and your life there sucks, just move to a country with a better government, with better laws, or with better whatever it is you're not happy about.