A or A

Okay, I was going to say something about taxes, but I’ve said enough already. If you want to know my opinion on taxes, they can be boiled down to this: “Fuck taxes” if you need more detail, just randomly read through my prior Medium posts and you will likely stumble upon my various opinions. Instead, I want to explore something more interesting. I have thought a lot about it, but not necessarily from the perspective I am about to do so from.

Anarchy. AnArChY. Same word, spelled the same, but with a disregard for writing accepted standards. Its like making the letter A with neat lines and fitting it nicely within the confines of a circle, rather than the mental institute wall scribbling of a maniac. Yes, I too like the nonconformity and raw fuckyouitedness of the original symbol, but I am afraid that the image has imparted its craziness on the concept against the will of the concept.

Anarchy has a weird association with rampant and uncontrolled violence. These two things are not the same and one does not necessarily lead to the other. Anarchy simply put, is a world without law and government (Government creates law, so as a natural result, no government results in no law). That does not mean a world without consequence, or even rules, but one without law or government.Anarchy, as in, lack of any government is also total human freedom. Yet, anarchy, has a bad rep, probably because some anarchists have no fucking idea what the actual concept means and just like to break shit and be “rebellious” whilst all donning the same ridiculous uniform and mask, which, if you are listening anarchists, is exactly what governments do, they make people conform, you know, wear the same ah, uniform and mask.

So it is because some stupid kids and a few really stupid adults have misappropriated anarchy and allowed Charles Manson to designed a logo for their version of anarchy that people never bother to really explore it mentally. I use the word explore, because it is much much different than simply thinking about something. Exploring an idea means testing it against reality and doing so vigorously. Thinking about something simply means, well, I gave it a thought, and I just don’t see it. A thought is what you have on the toilet. It happens in a second, ends in a quiet splash and gets flushed away forever. Exploration happens over a long period of time, involves writing things down and trying them out in reality. Big difference.

Here is a small story to digest and explore. A while back, there was a terrible snow storm and all, I mean all of the power was out for days. Traffic lights didnt work and streets were a slushy mess. I come to a busy intersection with multiple lights, in fact there are several turning lights at each side of the intersection. None of the lights worked and there was no traffic cop. People stopped, let others through in an orderly manner and traffic flowed more smoothly on those slushy streets than they ever did when the lights worked. There were no accidents, no violent road rage incidents and no confusion. Stop, let the first person at the light go and then take your turn in that order. It emerged from our desire for order and our fear of death. Nobody wanted to crash into another car or truck, so everyone just decided to go ahead and proceed cautiously.

So that is the mechanism that actually keeps us all from killing each other. It is fear of injury, death, loss or damage to property that causes us to be careful, to cooperate with others, not law. Law says you must obey traffic lights, but we only do so to avoid death. Now, of course there are maniacs, unhinged assholes will always exist and you cannot regulate them away. If you could, we could simply write a law that says terrorists are illegal and they would just disappear in a poof of smoke. Oh, wait, we already tried that and we still have terrorists. Anyway…

So, for some reason, every time a liberal or progressive (whats the difference) tries to explore anarchy with me, it stops cold at ROADS. Who will build them? Who will service them? Without government, there would be no roads! And so, we now have to choose a world full of freedom, but without roads, or a world full of taxes and police so we can have roads. False choice.

Does a farmer want to sell produce to the market? Yes. Does the market want produce from the farmer? Yes. Is the farm next to the market? Not always. So, roads are built. The costs are split. Meetings between farmer and market are held. Land owners in between are invited. People get together and make roads they want. It has happened before and it will always happen. People who want to get from A to B will make a path and if they don’t like off-roading it all the time, they will fucking pave the path. And if they don’t like pot holes, they will find a way to make sure it gets maintained and they will not force others to help them, they will incentivize them to help.

People being concerned for their own well being, looking out for their own needs and interests will cooperate, will act peacefully, will avoid conflict, because for most people, conflict is contrary to our needs and wants. Oh, but what about the bad people, the murders and thieves!

Murder is illegal. Theft is illegal. Do these laws prevent murder or theft? Nope. So, what then do the laws do? Well, it gives us a justification to use violence against someone who murders or steals. Do we really need a law to help us justify this? Nope. But, what about the process of determining guilt? Surely we need something to prevent people from suffering false accusations or being harmed on flimsy evidence. Couldn’t agree more, but do we need law for this, or just common sense. If a group of citizens is about to hang an innocent man, should you not interfere? Wouldn’t hanging an innocent man be murder too?

Here is where things break down a bit when conversations are had with people on the right and on the left. People think that because there is no authority, there is no way to conduct justice. There is some truth to that, but not quite as much as one would expect. Consider this. You are perfectly free to associate with whoever you want, be it an individual, or a group, or even a corporate entity with a specific purpose and charter. So, if you are a communist, you and your fellow travelers may get together and form a commune. You and your fellow commies can come up with whatever absurd book of rules you wish to adhere to, but note that this is strictly a voluntary organization, you cannot force anyone to join and if you try, they will suffer no repercussions should they put up any form of resistance, unless their resistance is excessive and leads to unnecessary harm or death. Consequence kicks in here. You cannot harm someone and not expect others to step in and um, return the favor, if you catch my drift. You can have a community that voluntarily follows certain rules and has specific consequences in place for breaking them, as well as certain procedures for handling rule breakers, like investigative methods and courts etc… But, you cannot FORCE anyone to join, they must join of their own free will.

Oh, but dude, that is what America is. Everyone follows agreed upon rules. No. Or rather, fuck NO. that is as far from the truth as anyone can possibly get. According to the criteria of the US government, I am a US citizen. How nice of them to automatically let me into the club just by being born here. But, I never once agreed to the laws that I am forced to follow. I didnt sign a contract that says I will agree to follow every regulation, pay every tax and adhere to every law of the land. In fact, I wasn’t even born when most of these rules were made, almost nobody alive today was born when these laws were written and the few who are, probably never once had a chance to say that they agree with and will comply with these rules. There is no such contract. Now, this is where voting supposedly comes into play. Somehow, by voting for politicians, we are giving some kind of tacit agreement to the rules. Well, lets assume I voted in various elections, does that mean that I agree to the rules that came along with the politicians that were elected? No. I never once said that I agree. The government gave me three awful choices:

  1. Vote for candidate A even though you disagree with almost everything he says he will do.
  2. Vote for candidate B even though you disagree with almost everything he says he will do, but perhaps less so that with candidate A.
  3. Don’t vote at all and have no chance at all at getting the one guy who is only SLIGHTLY more agreeable to me.

Its almost like a choice of shooting yourself in the arm, the buttocks, or having someone else select which place you get shot. In reality, I do not want ANY of these choices at all. I would elect to not get shot AT ALL, but that is not a option. It is not an option, because we have somehow given authority to the US government to use force against us when we do not follow the rules they made up regardless of whether they are good rules or even whether or not we agree with them. Voting, therefore is not a tacit agreement to anything at all, and if anyone wants to insist that it is, then they have to admit that the tens of MILLIONS of Americans who do not vote at all, have not tacitly agreed to anything at all and therefore cannot be forced to follow these laws.

So, we are down to a real pickle here. What about the violent people? What about the cheaters? What about the thieves? We cannot make them go away by writing more laws. Murder’s obviously have no intention of following the rules. Its not as if they are about to stab you and they are gently reminded that stabbing people is illegal and so they decide to put the knife down. Thieves didn’t forget that theft is illegal. But not everyone wants to deal with these problems. Not everyone has the capacity to offer consequences to these bad actions. So, you end up with a lot of people demanding law. Understandable? Yes. But this is problematic.

I am not a total anarchist. I believe in three laws:

  1. Do not harm or kill people.
  2. Do not steal and RESPECT other peoples property as well as their ability to enjoy and use their property.
  3. Respect your contractual obligations in so much as they do not require you to break these three rules.

The problem with government is that it allows politicians to make up more rules. Politicians find a way to make advantages for some and disadvantages for enemies. Politicians are corruptible and therefore will be corrupted. We don’t need politicians, we do not need a legislature. We simply need reasonable people to temporarily sit and oversee the prosecution of these crimes, and we need people who are willing to investigate and capture criminals.That is it.

Judges are temporary, lest they be corrupted. Police are private, so that they can compete for effectiveness. A public police department is one who reports to nobody and has no incentive at all to get it right. If you or your company cannot lose the job of protecting your local community, then you may act with impunity and it is very difficult to replace police if there are no other entities out there competing for their job. Imagine you and your neighbors form a small association and hire a security company to keep your area safe. You pay them to get it right. You pay them to follow procedure and not hurt people unless hurting them becomes a necessity. If they hurt people or act in a way that is harmful, then you fire them and hire a team that acts in amore professional manner. Can you fire your local police department? No, you can barely fire a cop who shoots an unarmed man from behind. Will some communities have better police than others? Probably, but so what. Inequality is never going to go away. Besides, some people may well step up and help poorer communities out. Maybe several poor communities can get together and split the cost, or perhaps, you have your own volunteer system. Do whatever you want and dont force people to join. Can people live in your neighborhood if they refuse to join your association? Its up to you.

So, for all of you who are eager to explore these ideas, here is a test, a way to explore this situation. Take a real life situation and ask yourself, can these three laws and this system of police and judges resolve this issue? Do not dismiss these ideas. Try them on. Explore.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.