Anarchy vs. an Ordered Government

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Maybe/maybe not. Which is why I am willing to compromise with ecovillages and things like bioregional democracy, local purchasing to support a local economy; local food production and distribution; appropiate technology, fair trade, ecology, etc.

And these things naturally evolve into something like we have today. For example: local food production. It wouldn't take long for someone to realize that it would be more efficient to specialize. One ecovillage would consistently produce excess rice that allows another to purchase food and work solely on producing for example lawn mowers. Before someone would come up with the ingenious idea to establish a currency to facilitate trading of the rice of ecovillage 1 and the lawn mowers of ecovillage 2. Then ecology goes out the window because "ecovillages" start to exploit the environment to have stronger industrial capacity. Of course, since there is no central government (yet), no one can stop the "ecovillages" from completely raping the environment.

 

[tomsnowman123]

And these things naturally evolve into something like we have today. For example: local food production. It wouldn't take long for someone to realize that it would be more efficient to specialize. One ecovillage would consistently produce excess rice that allows another to purchase food and work solely on producing for example lawn mowers. Before someone would come up with the ingenious idea to establish a currency to facilitate trading of the rice of ecovillage 1 and the lawn mowers of ecovillage 2. Then ecology goes out the window because "ecovillages" start to exploit the environment to have stronger industrial capacity. Of course, since there is no central government (yet), no one can stop the "ecovillages" from completely raping the environment.

Or they would naturally evolve into a eco/green-annarchy, as people see that the gradual movement away from government is a good thing.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Or they would naturally evolve into a eco/green-annarchy, as people see that the gradual movement away from government is a good thing.

Except that people are stupid and are easily manipulated into following governments.

Now I agree that reducing the role of government is good thing and that we should be moving in that direction. However this never occurs. I will use the United States as an example. Since its inception there has been nothing but increases in regulations and laws (except perhaps the repeal of prohibition).

"Once you give an order on a particular topic, you are responsible for always giving orders on that topic." Dune, Frank Herbert

Once the government latches hold of something it digs in and never lets go because the people never do anything about it.

 

[tomsnowman123]

Except that people are stupid and are easily manipulated into following governments.

Now I agree that reducing the role of government is good thing and that we should be moving in that direction. However this never occurs. I will use the United States as an example. Since its inception there has been nothing but increases in regulations and laws (except perhaps the repeal of prohibition).

"Once you give an order on a particular topic, you are responsible for always giving orders on that topic." Dune, Frank Herbert

Once the government latches hold of something it digs in and never lets go because the people never do anything about it.

That's why we need more people to advocate a green/eco-anarchy, to stop the US and it's movement towards more government (which may ultimately result in it's downfall). Anybody with me?

And not all people are stupid, there's got to be some smart people out there.

 

[Narz]

Have you ever read "Lord Of The Flies"? That is an excellent book that hows how a government is needed to prevent the citizens from going insan. I highly reccomend it.

#1 : It's fiction.
#2 : No girls on the island (that's the reason they went insane).

Definitely a good read though.

Aha! I have an idea! Go to Narz's thread about getting an island, and find one with all the resources that one would need to survive. Go to the island with whomever you wish, and live out your idyllic lifestyle there!

Yes, you'd definitely be welcome on my island Tom. I will save you a spot in my new country's government.

 

[Narz]

And not all people are stupid, there's got to be some smart people out there.

Exactally! Why would you want stupid people in your nation/eco-village anyway?

 

[Narz]

And these things naturally evolve into something like we have today. For example: local food production. It wouldn't take long for someone to realize that it would be more efficient to specialize.

It isn't more efficient to specialize. If it was modern man would have a 4-12 hour work week like many hunter gatherers do.

One ecovillage would consistently produce excess rice that allows another to purchase food and work solely on producing for example lawn mowers.

Screw lawn movers. Lawnmovers are only needed in a world of boring and destructive monoculture.

Before someone would come up with the ingenious idea to establish a currency to facilitate trading of the rice of ecovillage 1 and the lawn mowers of ecovillage 2. Then ecology goes out the window because "ecovillages" start to exploit the environment to have stronger industrial capacity. Of course, since there is no central government (yet), no one can stop the "ecovillages" from completely raping the environment.

Conclusion. Lawnmovers suck and greed for lawnmovers is the downfall of man!

Let nature grow freely!

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

That's why we need more people to advocate a green/eco-anarchy, to stop the US and it's movement towards more government (which may ultimately result in it's downfall). Anybody with me?

Advocating anarchy to stop the downfall of a government?

And not all people are stupid, there's got to be some smart people out there.

There are some very smart people out there. Individually, people on average are, well, of average intelligence (which is fairly smart). However, it is a well known fact that the more people you add to a room, the lower the average intelligence of the people in the room is.


I think I will stop posting in this thread for a while as I have noticed that it has been just you and me sparring for about a page.

 

[Perfection]

Besides, our bodies are still designer to work like we have a hunter-gatherer society today, so it would be much healthier for humanity.

Tell that to all them developed nations with life expectancies hovering around 80!

 

[Narz]

Tell that to all them developed nations with life expectancies hovering around 80!

There's more to life than age of death.

Of course I'm not advocating the hunter-gatherer lifestyle though. I do support eco-villages though, I plan to visit some someday and eventually start my own.

 

[Perfection]

There's more to life than age of death.

Like amassing vast collections of parasites?

I do support eco-villages though

Why?

 

[Mastreditr111]

Just a thought, but why not try something radical. BUILD the "military-industrial complex," just enough to build a space program... then we can move all industry in support of a modern lifestyle off-world, to orbit and the moon. (where they should theoretically be more efficient anyway) No pollution, overpopulation solved by emigration to moon and Mars (terraformed), all benefits of modern life retained, while most detrements removed. Also whichever nation to do this will have world hegemony, so no more military needed. Its about as plausible as anything advocated as anarchy thus far, so why not?

 

[Mastreditr111]

Also, infinite resources available from asteroid belt, Jovian and other moons, Oort Cloud, and solar energy.

 

[Narz]

Like amassing vast collections of parasites?

No, that's not what I had in mind. What made you choose that particular example?

Why?

For a better quality of life.

Mastreditr111, it would be much more cost effective to spend our mental and financial resources to create a better life on Earth. Living on Mars has ZERO appeal to me and I'd be willing to bet 99.9% of humanity wouldn't be down for it either (though you can post a poll if you'd like to try and prove me wrong ).

 

[Mastreditr111]

Ok. Might I suggest some reading? "The Stone Dogs" by S.M. Stirling, and the "Red Mars" trilogy, by Kim Stanley Robinson. They're both "Hard" science fiction, rooted in fact to a large extent.

As for solving social problems on Earth? Space-based industry is where its at. Zero-pollution, along with vast efficiency, productivity, and advancement. Faster production and research in zero-gee, as well as near-unlimited resources in the areas I already mentioned. One comet could provide drinking water for a country for a year, easily. One asteroid contains more iron than the world uses in steel every year, as well as enough Uranium to power all the world nuclear power plants for quite a while, and the platinum needed to fund the budget of a small country for a century, if used wisely to avoid inflationary problems.

 

[Perfection]

No, that's not what I had in mind. What made you choose that particular example?

Well, I'm just thinking of the various healt experiences that hunter-gatherers face.

For a better quality of life.

How would that improve your quality of life?

 

[Narz]

Well, I'm just thinking of the various healt experiences that hunter-gatherers face.

In many ways their health is superior to that of Western man.

Check out this page.

(note : I disagree that animal products need to be part of the diet but it's still a compelling site)

How would that improve your quality of life?

1. I would get to live with my friends.
2. We would collectively own the land instead of having to rent it (throwing away hundreds of dollars a month, thousands or tens of thousands a year).
3. We could collectively grow alot of our own food minimizing our dependence on outside sources (and controlling the process for optimal nutrition & taste)
4. We could do with the land what we choose (build how and what we want, zone the land however we want, etc.) and split the costs
5. I would know and be able to trust my neighbors (anyone not trusted could be ousted), same as point #1 really
6. It would be fun (same as point #1 really)
7. With enough variety of skills and talents we could help each other with our problems (instead of having to call various "professionals", at a cost, out of the phone book whenever we had a problem). For example we could have community plumbers, electricians, clothing designers, computer technicians, architects, masseurs, web designers, farmers etc. all living within the community. Not to say we'd be independent of the outside world but certainly we could be in case of emergency.
8. We could hook the whole community up to a solar or wind powered system (sharing the power) thus becoming independent of "the grid"
9. It would be fun
10. I could go on forever but I'm sure you can think of a billion and one more reasons yourself while communal living would be better.

Ok. Might I suggest some reading? "The Stone Dogs" by S.M. Stirling, and the "Red Mars" trilogy, by Kim Stanley Robinson. They're both "Hard" science fiction, rooted in fact to a large extent.

As for solving social problems on Earth? Space-based industry is where its at. Zero-pollution, along with vast efficiency, productivity, and advancement. Faster production and research in zero-gee, as well as near-unlimited resources in the areas I already mentioned. One comet could provide drinking water for a country for a year, easily. One asteroid contains more iron than the world uses in steel every year, as well as enough Uranium to power all the world nuclear power plants for quite a while, and the platinum needed to fund the budget of a small country for a century, if used wisely to avoid inflationary problems.

Thanks for the suggestions Mastreditr. I can certainly agree with you that our government's money would be better suited towards a space program than towards weapons of mass destruction (the military). However, if we can't manage the Earth what makes you think we won't screw up any planets we inhabit (whose climates will undoubtedly be much more fragile than Earth's)? I have no qualms with anyone who wants to start space colonies (I think the idea is rather cool actually) but personally I feel at home here on Earth's magnetic field and am not ready to call it quits just yet.

 

[Narz]

Perf, scroll down & look at the photos on that page, hard to argue with evidence like that.

 

[Mastreditr111]

Thanks for the suggestions Mastreditr. I can certainly agree with you that our government's money would be better suited towards a space program than towards weapons of mass destruction (the military). However, if we can't manage the Earth what makes you think we won't screw up any planets we inhabit (whose climates will undoubtedly be much more fragile than Earth's)? I have no qualms with anyone who wants to start space colonies (I think the idea is rather cool actually) but personally I feel at home here on Earth's magnetic field and am not ready to call it quits just yet.

Yea, I think the colonization part ought to be put off until we can deal with our own planet, too. However, the resource and industry part would benefit us immensely. Lots of potential for corruption, but also for vast good. Even with corruption, it would still give higher yields than current industry does here.

 

[HawkeyeGS]

I really don't understand the attraction of anarchy. It is like a vacume and you all know what gets put in them eventually. This is not to say I am about to set sail for Airstrip One either.