I had a long debate on my last posts, where I described how Anarchism could practically be inserted into society, and not all these ideological fantasies that are nearly impossible to accomplish.

I have been thinking about this a lot, but it looks like other's haven't so they come with circlejerk arguments that I have already considered, and most likely rejected. See it doesn't matter what fantasies people believe in, if we want this to work, it has to be practically possible, otherwise it doesn't matter. So we have to throw away fantasies, and focus on real achievable goals.

Let me list you a few problems:

NAP = Ok it's a nice concept, but it's literally impossible to achieve. Because somewhere, sometime you will have a conflict, that will escalate, and it will drag most people into it. So a government will be formed eventually. It's impossible to avoid.

Self Defense = It's a nice concept to imagine everyone defending themselves, however most people are unwilling or incapable to do it, so you need to delegate this to trained professionals.

Swarm Defense= It's a nice concept to imagine that everyone defending their own property would come together against an organized threat, voluntarily, but it doesn't happen. Hitler literally invaded cities with 10,000-20,000 troops, whereas the cities had a population of 1,000,000-5,000,000. Even if everyone would have picked up a bat or a knife, they could have driven out the Nazis. If every city would have done that, Hitler would have been defeated in 1 week. Instead of this they just hid in the basement, cowardly. So human psychology tells us that people are rather cowards, even in the face of a deadly enemy.

Private Army = It's a nice concept to think about a society, post government, where everyone will just hire his own army to defend his property. However the richest guy in the area will have the biggest army. So he will become the local aristocrat. The aristocrats then will come together and elect a king. And then instead of having an anarchist society, we cycle back into feudalism. Well done.

And these are just the few examples we have here. It's literally impossible to have freedom without a form of collective restraint. The problem is that people are centralizing power by default, with or without government. So without a form restraint, we can't stop a tyrant assuming total power.

So what we need is Socialism, yes, Political Socialism. Socialism in the sense that we need to redistribute the political power, away from the tyrant, and back into the people's hands.

Of course we should keep Capitalism as an economic theory, so we should have:

Political Socialism & Economic Capitalism

Because in my view, economic power is not a threat, if it doesn't carry political power with it. So redistributing money is not necessary, and obviously, it's immoral, and detrimental to society.

You can't tax geniuses and subsidize idiots. But you have to "tax" tyrants and "subsidize" individuals.

So political power has to be decentralized as much as possible to prohibit a tyrant assuming total power. But having a billionaire without political power is not really a threat. Wealth inequality is not a problem, unless it carries political inequality.

And wealth inequality gaps would not be so great anyway if not for the political centralization. There would not be starving people nor totally impoverished people, if not for the wars and the general government tyranny we see around us.

So this is how I would envision anarchism in practice:

Political decentralization & Economic Liberty

This also implies some basic tiny taxes just so that we can protect this system, that guarantees decentralization of political power:

So I advocated a tiny property tax, or even a flat yearly fee, that's all

No income tax, no social security tax, no sales tax, nothing more, just a flat yearly fee or something similar, just enough to fund the decentralized machine. Of course many anarchists got angry " how dare I advocate for taxation". But you don't get it! This is the only way we can have liberty, if we don't set up a system like this, then inevitably we will have feudalism again.

Humans will inevitably centralize political power, unless there is a clear decentralized platform, like a direct democracy to directly stop this. We don't want our anarchist society to turn into feudalism and monarchy, that is the last thing we want.

So the "lack of a system" mentality is not valid, it will always lead to feudalism. So anarchism itself has to be a system, but a system of decentralization of political power.





So this is not communism, communism implies socialized economy as well. We know that can't work, because you can't tax geniuses and can't subsidize idiots. But this is a 50% - 50% compromise between capitalism and the left. To make everyone happy.

I don't think there is any other way we can achieve freedom. Anything more is already tyranny, and anything less will be tyranny. So freedom is in the middle of 2 tyrannical forces: aristocracy & collectivism.

Furthermore, thankfully this is already happening. Cryprocurrency is exactly this, you have private property in forms of private keys, that is unalienable. But you have a direct democracy on the network side, as individual nodes vote on policy.

And it works: Steemit, Bitcoin, Dash, Monero, Synereo, you name it.... All of them are essentially this kind of social experiment.

So nature already favors this theory, by letting cryptocurrencies become a reality. So we anarchists also need to embrace this phenomena, ideologically and intellectually. This is how balance can be achieved in society.

Sources:

https://pixabay.com

Upvote, ReSteem &