That's an excellent argument! I've had a number of discussions with libertarian anarchists and the books they recommended. You've described the rationale behind the lack of a viable solution for that perspective well. All of the solutions they have described are just pieces of an illusion just as we live in an illusion of democracy now. It would be even easier for the power elite to be in control through shear force.
My thinking continually comes back to power. Anyone who has great power from great wealth will control everyone else because they can afford to buy the force to get what they want. That happens now also. But there are some laws that protect us from them that sometimes work depending on how far up the food chain they are. But in the liberal anarchy scenario, it would be might makes right. I have yet to hear an argument that dispels that.
In reality, there is only one power great enough to protect the masses. That is the unified power of the masses. Studies and experience in collective intelligence demonstrate that the masses also have the greatest ability to solve complex National problems. I believe that a direct democracy that uses a better method than yes/no voting, that provides a solution process that optimizes the collective intelligence while controlling emotions, and that prevents external influence from corporations, political parties, and the wealthy elite would be a better governing system.
I love how thorough your book is. You really know your way around civics! Pop a link to it in here in case anyone wants to see your upgrade to US Democracy 2.0
“The state only needs to then tax a certain portion of it back to manage inflation and to ensure widespread coercive use of the currency.”
I will always chafe at this definitive explanation that coercion of currency is necessary for its value. Too much anthropology to give that an unalloyed primary reason. It is a factor, but it is one of many and I guess my primary objection is that it is referred to in absence of all the other factors that make a currency useful to a society. For instance, cultures of Central America use cocoa beans as currency.
The particular notions of a coercion is an artifact of European culture and particular.
The best part of cocoa as money: it actually grew on trees, naturally found itself retired in the ritual and cultural events of the society. It probably was a form of payment to the culture’s elites. Kings were known to have hoards of the stuff in the many thousands of kg of the stuff.
When you have a spare 45 minutes, go watch this video which explains the role of chocolate as a currency. Especially with a hot cup.
“ The widespread ‘adoption’ of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin being a prime example, is a clear sign of this digital financial transformation. ”
Cryptocurrencies were inappropriately named. In terms of volume as a means of exchange they are a joke. And to be honest, the transaction time necessary is so retarded long that the ability of any of the cryptocurrency is to actually function as a digital currency, it’s just not worth giving any attention to.
It’s speculative that much I’ll grant you and people have used it to pay for stuff, but one of the desirable features of the currencies price stability, cryptocurrencies in new way share that attribute.
None of these guys fantasies about a future last when the technological supply chain that keeps all of this in operation is subject to environmental destruction, both of the infrastructure used to it, and by the limits resources necessary to even create the structure itself.
If there is going to be a future society, it is going to be the one the security experts, billionaires and interrogated for how to ensure that people remain loyal to them is the dystopic post apocalyptic world they are building all their shelters for. The advice was to build a self-sufficient community, exactly the kind of effort these men have ruined the world trying to insulate themselves from.
Yeah, I think there’s a rather notable guardian article from 2022 on that topic, written by an author who wrote the entire book on the subject matter.
The solution to human survival is not gonna come from the wealthiest people, in fact, they are the primary driver of the existential threat to all mankind we are now dealing with.
That's an excellent argument! I've had a number of discussions with libertarian anarchists and the books they recommended. You've described the rationale behind the lack of a viable solution for that perspective well. All of the solutions they have described are just pieces of an illusion just as we live in an illusion of democracy now. It would be even easier for the power elite to be in control through shear force.
My thinking continually comes back to power. Anyone who has great power from great wealth will control everyone else because they can afford to buy the force to get what they want. That happens now also. But there are some laws that protect us from them that sometimes work depending on how far up the food chain they are. But in the liberal anarchy scenario, it would be might makes right. I have yet to hear an argument that dispels that.
In reality, there is only one power great enough to protect the masses. That is the unified power of the masses. Studies and experience in collective intelligence demonstrate that the masses also have the greatest ability to solve complex National problems. I believe that a direct democracy that uses a better method than yes/no voting, that provides a solution process that optimizes the collective intelligence while controlling emotions, and that prevents external influence from corporations, political parties, and the wealthy elite would be a better governing system.
I love how thorough your book is. You really know your way around civics! Pop a link to it in here in case anyone wants to see your upgrade to US Democracy 2.0
And by the way, you really do have a gift. I love your writing style!
I want to be just like you when I grow up.
Thank you. High praise indeed!
“The state only needs to then tax a certain portion of it back to manage inflation and to ensure widespread coercive use of the currency.”
I will always chafe at this definitive explanation that coercion of currency is necessary for its value. Too much anthropology to give that an unalloyed primary reason. It is a factor, but it is one of many and I guess my primary objection is that it is referred to in absence of all the other factors that make a currency useful to a society. For instance, cultures of Central America use cocoa beans as currency.
The particular notions of a coercion is an artifact of European culture and particular.
The best part of cocoa as money: it actually grew on trees, naturally found itself retired in the ritual and cultural events of the society. It probably was a form of payment to the culture’s elites. Kings were known to have hoards of the stuff in the many thousands of kg of the stuff.
When you have a spare 45 minutes, go watch this video which explains the role of chocolate as a currency. Especially with a hot cup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4nBlkk1210
I used to chafe too but I just stopped buying the cheap brand underpants :)
Thanks for the link I’m checking it out
Silk or cotton really is the way to go.
“ The widespread ‘adoption’ of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin being a prime example, is a clear sign of this digital financial transformation. ”
Cryptocurrencies were inappropriately named. In terms of volume as a means of exchange they are a joke. And to be honest, the transaction time necessary is so retarded long that the ability of any of the cryptocurrency is to actually function as a digital currency, it’s just not worth giving any attention to.
It’s speculative that much I’ll grant you and people have used it to pay for stuff, but one of the desirable features of the currencies price stability, cryptocurrencies in new way share that attribute.
None of these guys fantasies about a future last when the technological supply chain that keeps all of this in operation is subject to environmental destruction, both of the infrastructure used to it, and by the limits resources necessary to even create the structure itself.
If there is going to be a future society, it is going to be the one the security experts, billionaires and interrogated for how to ensure that people remain loyal to them is the dystopic post apocalyptic world they are building all their shelters for. The advice was to build a self-sufficient community, exactly the kind of effort these men have ruined the world trying to insulate themselves from.
Yeah, I think there’s a rather notable guardian article from 2022 on that topic, written by an author who wrote the entire book on the subject matter.
The solution to human survival is not gonna come from the wealthiest people, in fact, they are the primary driver of the existential threat to all mankind we are now dealing with.