But 'part of one' what? That really became the issue. Becoming 'one' with the Black Panthers or The Weather Underground or the Symbionese Liberation Army or The People's Temple didn't work out so well.
However, I do think that hallucinogens were an important part of the 'religion' of the 60s. It was how alienated White youth bound together with each other. Think every Grateful Dead concert.
The choice is yours. That’s what’s important about the freedom of choice. The greatest gift God has given us. You decide. Do you want to line up with the good or do you want to line up with the bad?
There may be two stones to dig up. Do I stop caring about what others think or what others think about me? We have no control over what others think so it is pointless to care. If I let the idea of what others think about me get into my head, therein lies ruin.
"They gain a little ground, and then we do. Back and forth. Forever. Force them to live under our way before they force us to live under theirs. Forever. And when your shield arm tires, you pass the task onto your children and their children"- precisely Chris! Stuck forever.
First of all, let me say I appreciate you struggling with these kinds of issues.
'We do not yet have a modern example of a panarchic, consent-respecting society operating at scale.'
Have you read Colin Ward? If not, 'Autonomy, solidarity, possibility: the Colin Ward reader' is a great resource.
I raise Ward because he operates under the assumption that *wherever possible* 'anarchy' is the default mode of most 'human scale' groups. In other words, *if you know where to look* we may not have a visible 'society' of panarchism, but without panarchism, there would be no society to speak of. It's 'anarchism' that keeps societies social.
By way of critique, I'd wonder where the 'park' for Population B would come from? How do we get to 'public projects' that require continual care and maintenance from 'panarchism'?
Or, more importantly, other 'public utilities' like roads, or canals or dams and locks?
I'm not saying we can't 'have nice things' in a One Size Does Not Fit All world, but that conceptualizing how we'd get there is worth considering.
My own view is that, in due course, any 'anarchic' or 'localist' continental arrangement will eventually bring about a 'continental concordat' of 'rights' of some sort to cover travel, transportation, etc.
—I think that theory is correct. Most things are anarchic and function just fine.
"By way of critique, I'd wonder where the 'park' for Population B would come from?"
—Good question. I was creating a parable, but in a real condition of panarchy, it would depend.
Some people would form private polities…
A for-profit micro-nation would likely pay for public spaces out of its revenue to attract customers who would rent property there, shop in its zocalo, etc. A free city with a minarchist government might do the same.
Or, in a fully anarcho-capitalist area, a private person or entity may create a for-profit park. Funding could come from use fees, vendor fees charged at periodic market events, or some other means.
And on and on. In a free market, if there is a need, people will find a way to fill it and profit from it.
Roads are easy, especially now that we have transponder technology. Private, for-profit roads are entirely possible. Transponder technology would easily be standardized so that a single device could be used. Agreements would arise to standardize the routing of fees for use to the owner of each section of road. Indeed, a third-party service would likely arise to facilitate that. Just like the National Association of Manufacturers standardizes things now in private cooperation among businesses, the same thing would happen.
Canals and dams would be built if someone expected to profit from them. Generating power, moving goods. Levees would be built by developers who wanted to sell property closer to the river but didn't want to be on the hook for lawsuits (in the private court system) for people getting flooded out.
The market always finds a way.
"eventually bring about a 'continental concordat' of 'rights' of some sort to cover travel, transportation, etc."
—Yes, exactly.
There is a great moment in Chapter 12 of Hoppe's (https://ia801508.us.archive.org/14/items/911-material/Pdfs/Democracy%20The%20God%20That%20Failed.pdf) that describes how a common law would arise out of various agencies solving intra-agency cases and disputes. It would just be a more advanced manifestation of the way multinational insurers work things out among themselves now (without any help from governments). And the same thing would likely happen with rights. "Continental Concordat" is a pretty cool term!
Well, I saw a study that took a look at the “wild west” when virtually everyOne was armed, and presumed to be and compared cities with similar population and industry with eastern cities that had “gun control” laws. Most were not armed and People were presumed not to be.
What They found was that crime in the “wild west” was about 10% of the crime in the east…
So… I don’t know about “nicer,” but They tend to choose Their behavior Ethically in much higher percentages.
I do not doubt there was a gun fight or three, but… It surely was not the norm. People expected to face the barrel if They behaved too poorly, so They kept Their behavior within acceptable parameters.
1) In my time on this planet I've seen most people spend their lives making themselves miserable in order to live up to other people's expectations and hating the few individuals who try to go their own way in life...
2) What does Population B do if Population A wants and has the means to inflict a world destroying thermonuclear war on them?
A lot of these decades or centuries old systems fall apart when the people start to realize they’re living under a government of lies. With this debt and maybe more destructive the inflation, America’s standard of living has and will continue to fall. If you are from a “middle class” family and aged 16 - 28 your chances of ever owning a home and property has become nearly impossible. As the government continues to overspend trillions of dollars each year shifting wealth from the poor and middle class to the elites and elite politicians things will continue to decline and eventually completely crash.
We keep putting off change, holding onto things we know we should let go of. What you are unwilling to change today is what we will be stuck with tomorrow and beyond.
History repeats itself over and over again and I love making those connections. This is a quote from David, “Don’t sit inactive in the path of the unGodly”. We certainly all are witnesses to the unGodly trying its best to take control over us in the past 5 years. I would say when this current system collapses under its debt and inflation, and it will, the only chance a portion of territory could accept your panarchic system would be at that point. There will be many authoritarians at the trough at that time.
We've got to live together!
I am no better, and neither are you.
We are the same whatever we do.
You love me, you hate me, you know me and then,
you can't figure out the bag I'm in.
I am everyday people! 🎵🎶🎼
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YUUhDoCx8zc
Ha! I think we have an upcoming #FreedomMusicFriday. Thanks!
One thing about the 60s hippie movement is they all were aware of becoming one and being part of one. The psilocybin mushrooms? LSD?
Yep!
It truly does open up your mind too love and peace.
And melting walls.
You have to take a *lot* to melt walls.
Ha! Ha! 😃👊
But 'part of one' what? That really became the issue. Becoming 'one' with the Black Panthers or The Weather Underground or the Symbionese Liberation Army or The People's Temple didn't work out so well.
However, I do think that hallucinogens were an important part of the 'religion' of the 60s. It was how alienated White youth bound together with each other. Think every Grateful Dead concert.
The choice is yours. That’s what’s important about the freedom of choice. The greatest gift God has given us. You decide. Do you want to line up with the good or do you want to line up with the bad?
There may be two stones to dig up. Do I stop caring about what others think or what others think about me? We have no control over what others think so it is pointless to care. If I let the idea of what others think about me get into my head, therein lies ruin.
That is the next/followup installment: stop caring what others thing about US.
Yes, we don't want to be social pariahs, but other than that, screw that. As you say, there's no way to control what others think.
Also, no matter what you do, how well you do, how much good you do, you will always have people who still hate you. So screw that too.
Plus, you have to be a bit disagreeable to see innovative ideas through to completion.
All sorts of reasons not to care!
I'm checking out of Hotel California for sure. So my son never has to go anywhere but up no matter what.
Nice.
Have you heard the Monalisa Twins cover of Hotel California? I like those gals.
No I haven't but I llike the one in Spanish by The Gipsy Kings. I'll have to check out the one you suggested.
“ the one in Spanish by The Gipsy Kings”
—upbeat!
I like the Mona Lisa Twins because they sing songs mocking the government, but make the songs pretty :)
A goal worth pursuing!
"They gain a little ground, and then we do. Back and forth. Forever. Force them to live under our way before they force us to live under theirs. Forever. And when your shield arm tires, you pass the task onto your children and their children"- precisely Chris! Stuck forever.
We're getting out, JJ.
Or we'll make it so that our kids can get out.
Very thought-provoking!
I think it may be one of those evolutionary linchpins…
First of all, let me say I appreciate you struggling with these kinds of issues.
'We do not yet have a modern example of a panarchic, consent-respecting society operating at scale.'
Have you read Colin Ward? If not, 'Autonomy, solidarity, possibility: the Colin Ward reader' is a great resource.
I raise Ward because he operates under the assumption that *wherever possible* 'anarchy' is the default mode of most 'human scale' groups. In other words, *if you know where to look* we may not have a visible 'society' of panarchism, but without panarchism, there would be no society to speak of. It's 'anarchism' that keeps societies social.
By way of critique, I'd wonder where the 'park' for Population B would come from? How do we get to 'public projects' that require continual care and maintenance from 'panarchism'?
Or, more importantly, other 'public utilities' like roads, or canals or dams and locks?
I'm not saying we can't 'have nice things' in a One Size Does Not Fit All world, but that conceptualizing how we'd get there is worth considering.
My own view is that, in due course, any 'anarchic' or 'localist' continental arrangement will eventually bring about a 'continental concordat' of 'rights' of some sort to cover travel, transportation, etc.
"Have you read Colin Ward?"
—I have not. I'll look it up!
"It's 'anarchism' that keeps societies social."
—I think that theory is correct. Most things are anarchic and function just fine.
"By way of critique, I'd wonder where the 'park' for Population B would come from?"
—Good question. I was creating a parable, but in a real condition of panarchy, it would depend.
Some people would form private polities…
A for-profit micro-nation would likely pay for public spaces out of its revenue to attract customers who would rent property there, shop in its zocalo, etc. A free city with a minarchist government might do the same.
Or, in a fully anarcho-capitalist area, a private person or entity may create a for-profit park. Funding could come from use fees, vendor fees charged at periodic market events, or some other means.
And on and on. In a free market, if there is a need, people will find a way to fill it and profit from it.
Roads are easy, especially now that we have transponder technology. Private, for-profit roads are entirely possible. Transponder technology would easily be standardized so that a single device could be used. Agreements would arise to standardize the routing of fees for use to the owner of each section of road. Indeed, a third-party service would likely arise to facilitate that. Just like the National Association of Manufacturers standardizes things now in private cooperation among businesses, the same thing would happen.
Canals and dams would be built if someone expected to profit from them. Generating power, moving goods. Levees would be built by developers who wanted to sell property closer to the river but didn't want to be on the hook for lawsuits (in the private court system) for people getting flooded out.
The market always finds a way.
"eventually bring about a 'continental concordat' of 'rights' of some sort to cover travel, transportation, etc."
—Yes, exactly.
There is a great moment in Chapter 12 of Hoppe's (https://ia801508.us.archive.org/14/items/911-material/Pdfs/Democracy%20The%20God%20That%20Failed.pdf) that describes how a common law would arise out of various agencies solving intra-agency cases and disputes. It would just be a more advanced manifestation of the way multinational insurers work things out among themselves now (without any help from governments). And the same thing would likely happen with rights. "Continental Concordat" is a pretty cool term!
Aside from the fact that I think We all should have guns in Our hands - or presume all Others armed... Good piece!!!
I am all for being armed!
I thought so but there was a comparison there talking about if everyOne had a gun… LOL! I knew what You were trying to convey…
Do you mean that everyone armed means nicer people?
Well, I saw a study that took a look at the “wild west” when virtually everyOne was armed, and presumed to be and compared cities with similar population and industry with eastern cities that had “gun control” laws. Most were not armed and People were presumed not to be.
What They found was that crime in the “wild west” was about 10% of the crime in the east…
So… I don’t know about “nicer,” but They tend to choose Their behavior Ethically in much higher percentages.
Oh yes, I am glad you brought that up. The trope of gunfights and violence in the Wild West is irritating because it is the opposite of the truth!
I do not doubt there was a gun fight or three, but… It surely was not the norm. People expected to face the barrel if They behaved too poorly, so They kept Their behavior within acceptable parameters.
1) In my time on this planet I've seen most people spend their lives making themselves miserable in order to live up to other people's expectations and hating the few individuals who try to go their own way in life...
2) What does Population B do if Population A wants and has the means to inflict a world destroying thermonuclear war on them?
Large, well-capitalized multinational aggression insurers with a fiduciary responsibility to protect their customers.
Profit motive to accomplish the task as efficiently as possible.
Overlapping coterminous jurisdictions magnifies the protective net.
Recommended:
https://christophercook.substack.com/p/how-would-we-protect-ourselves-in
Chapter 12 here: https://ia801508.us.archive.org/14/items/911-material/Pdfs/Democracy%20The%20God%20That%20Failed.pdf
Will be checking these out...
You're on the path!
Borders? I wouldn't trust anything from that guy.
I dunno. He's named after a bookstore—I figure he must know *something*.
@Christopher Cook
The more essays by liberty-inclined folks I read, the gladder I am that I am 98% full of don't-give-a-fucks.
Thanks to Mr Cook for this essay.
"98% full of don't-give-a-fucks."
—A very healthy way to be!
A lot of these decades or centuries old systems fall apart when the people start to realize they’re living under a government of lies. With this debt and maybe more destructive the inflation, America’s standard of living has and will continue to fall. If you are from a “middle class” family and aged 16 - 28 your chances of ever owning a home and property has become nearly impossible. As the government continues to overspend trillions of dollars each year shifting wealth from the poor and middle class to the elites and elite politicians things will continue to decline and eventually completely crash.
We keep putting off change, holding onto things we know we should let go of. What you are unwilling to change today is what we will be stuck with tomorrow and beyond.
History repeats itself over and over again and I love making those connections. This is a quote from David, “Don’t sit inactive in the path of the unGodly”. We certainly all are witnesses to the unGodly trying its best to take control over us in the past 5 years. I would say when this current system collapses under its debt and inflation, and it will, the only chance a portion of territory could accept your panarchic system would be at that point. There will be many authoritarians at the trough at that time.
Being ready for collapse is one component of the strategy, for sure!
Excellent article and premise Christopher!
🙏🏻🔥
I see that you now have. Thank you. Chime in anytime!
In fact, I am going to quote you next week :-)
That's pretty good, Ophelia!
I have had that as an inchoate thought, but never quite so concretely, and I've never heard the quote.
Is the quote attributable to a particular person?
Walken LOL!
Thank you, Dave.