From: Eugen Leitl (eugen@leitl.org)
Date: Sat Nov 09 2002 - 07:53:16 MST
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
> Very good points. I presented much the same arguments to Dan some time
> ago, but he's a tough cookie :-), still wants the glory of the
> anarchy, even if it won't last too long. Did you read our discussions
> on the demarchy? This would be one way of getting a bit closer to the
> ideal of freedom for all, without giving up the stability that a
> little bit of enslavement brings.
As long as you can't change the properties of the average human agent the
resulting change in society structure will remain unstable.
It requires a vastly different kind of human animal for even a libertarian
society (not talking about cryptoanarchy) to be stable.
Given that your average libertarian is frequently a nutjob it is
unsurprising that all attempts to establish grassroots synthetic societies
completely tanked. It's not the evil legacy systems shooting you full of
holes, it's the nature of the beast all by itself.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:01 MST