One “good” thing (probably the only good thing) about the Covid lockdown was that parents saw the lousy stuff being taught by the public schools. Add that to the strident demands of teacher unions, and the number of parents giving up on public schools and homeschooling their kids has increased dramatically. A good example of opting out.
It's just an inchoate thought, but it occurs to me that that points up another drawback of continuing to participate in the system (and to claim that the system is all we have): While we could certainly have it worse than we do in a vaguely functional democracy, the push and pull keeps us in a kind of limbo—never as good as it ought to be, and rarely as bad as is needed to wake people up.
I hear this clearly. And I hear moving toward it much more than we are today. But I still believe humans are systemic animals. That is, they will naturally cleave towards a method for taking care of things in the aggregate, 'for society'. If we don't draw the picture of what that looks like past 'opting out' many can't see it and therefore, can't aim for it. Using the atrocious schools as an example is good. What will we do about infrastructure to connect with others? What will we do about lawlessness and bodily harm? How will we handle commerce and exchange? I'm not saying we can't, I'm saying draw a picture for people... Help them vision past 'give it all up'.
Admittedly, I have not written as much on what comes next. But I have written some, and I have also pointed people in the direction of the fairly substantial body of literature on the subject. And I do plan to write more.
In the meantime, here is something I wrote to another commenter this morning:
—-
I have begun to realize just how little even the basics of the solution have not penetrated. Not even among many classical liberals. I am at an event right now with people I would expect to know, and many still do not.
Like any real idea, it can be described simply, and then must be reinforced with lots of deeper exploration.
Right now, security and justice are imposed by a single entity claiming a monopoly of authority over a given territory and people. Its authority is imposed through the initiation of coercive force (taxation, law) etc. (and your consent to this arrangement is, through an act of cheap philosophical legerdemain, deemed “tacit” and “implied”).
The solution is usually called market anarchism, anarchocapitalism, voluntaryism, etc. Instead of security and justice being imposed in the way described above, it is instead provided by agencies operating in a free and open market. Instead of the people being involuntary subjects of a particular regime, they choose to be customers of one agency or another. Instead of the many perverse incentives of government, you have market incentives. (We trust market incentives for everything else-knowing that the market produces shoes and ice cream and Swedish massage better than government ever could; market anarchists contend that security and justice are no different.)
The details of how this can work, and replies to common objections, cannot be summed up quickly. But there is vast literature on the subject.
Also note that there have been partial examples of this in the past, that elements of it already exist, and that fledgling modern iterations are being formed as we speak.
I was blown away, when I first started learning about it all, how much has gone on, and is going on, that I simply did not know about. It’s a whole new world.
This is a good start. But in order to properly implement a non-system, you have to translate from books and big thinkers to the practical. I know you know this, but that's the step that comes after NO! Once people say NO they're more open to "what next"? I'm just trying to pull you back from your marathon plans to a 5k...😊 paint a picture in steps...
One “good” thing (probably the only good thing) about the Covid lockdown was that parents saw the lousy stuff being taught by the public schools. Add that to the strident demands of teacher unions, and the number of parents giving up on public schools and homeschooling their kids has increased dramatically. A good example of opting out.
Yes, big time! Overreach often spurs awakening.
It's just an inchoate thought, but it occurs to me that that points up another drawback of continuing to participate in the system (and to claim that the system is all we have): While we could certainly have it worse than we do in a vaguely functional democracy, the push and pull keeps us in a kind of limbo—never as good as it ought to be, and rarely as bad as is needed to wake people up.
I hear this clearly. And I hear moving toward it much more than we are today. But I still believe humans are systemic animals. That is, they will naturally cleave towards a method for taking care of things in the aggregate, 'for society'. If we don't draw the picture of what that looks like past 'opting out' many can't see it and therefore, can't aim for it. Using the atrocious schools as an example is good. What will we do about infrastructure to connect with others? What will we do about lawlessness and bodily harm? How will we handle commerce and exchange? I'm not saying we can't, I'm saying draw a picture for people... Help them vision past 'give it all up'.
Admittedly, I have not written as much on what comes next. But I have written some, and I have also pointed people in the direction of the fairly substantial body of literature on the subject. And I do plan to write more.
In the meantime, here is something I wrote to another commenter this morning:
—-
I have begun to realize just how little even the basics of the solution have not penetrated. Not even among many classical liberals. I am at an event right now with people I would expect to know, and many still do not.
Like any real idea, it can be described simply, and then must be reinforced with lots of deeper exploration.
Right now, security and justice are imposed by a single entity claiming a monopoly of authority over a given territory and people. Its authority is imposed through the initiation of coercive force (taxation, law) etc. (and your consent to this arrangement is, through an act of cheap philosophical legerdemain, deemed “tacit” and “implied”).
The solution is usually called market anarchism, anarchocapitalism, voluntaryism, etc. Instead of security and justice being imposed in the way described above, it is instead provided by agencies operating in a free and open market. Instead of the people being involuntary subjects of a particular regime, they choose to be customers of one agency or another. Instead of the many perverse incentives of government, you have market incentives. (We trust market incentives for everything else-knowing that the market produces shoes and ice cream and Swedish massage better than government ever could; market anarchists contend that security and justice are no different.)
The details of how this can work, and replies to common objections, cannot be summed up quickly. But there is vast literature on the subject.
Also note that there have been partial examples of this in the past, that elements of it already exist, and that fledgling modern iterations are being formed as we speak.
I was blown away, when I first started learning about it all, how much has gone on, and is going on, that I simply did not know about. It’s a whole new world.
This is a good start. But in order to properly implement a non-system, you have to translate from books and big thinkers to the practical. I know you know this, but that's the step that comes after NO! Once people say NO they're more open to "what next"? I'm just trying to pull you back from your marathon plans to a 5k...😊 paint a picture in steps...
As soon as I get two seconds to rub together, I am going to be releasing installments on a new book that does just that.
I'll be looking forward to reading it.
I am looking forward to writing it!
It is started…
Right on Target!
Násie, mellon!