From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Nov 12 2002 - 12:52:41 MST
-- Rafal Smigrodzki <rms2g@virginia.edu> wrote:
> Charles Hixson wrote:
>
> > So the problem becomes: How to create a social structure where
> > either there are no centralizations of power, or where those who
> > control the centralized power can have no effect on it's continued
> > existence. This isn't an easy job, but it's what is required for a
> > stable libertarian society. (You may achieve a libertarian society
> > without this, but it won't be stable.)
>
> ### 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.
Well, Vernor Vinge came up with an interesting solution in his novella
"Conquest by Default", in which an alien anarcho-libertarian society
with green skin called 'Mikins' (i.e. Americans) colonize a
postApocalyptic Earth populated by humans only in Australia, Argentina,
and South Africa, humans who are pursuing a more perfect socialist
democracy.
The Mikins have a caste of "umpires" whose sole job is to be on the
lookout for 'bigness' and who issue 'anti-trust' rulings against
organizations which have grown too large, either in number of
employees, market control, etc. Eventually, human socialist governments
run afoul of an umpire anti-trust ruling when humans get recognised as
'people'.
While Vinge seems to not be enamored of anarchist society, picturing it
as brutish and uncompassionate, he presents a viable option for
ensuring it's stability through the umpire system.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:03 MST