RE: What is with all the anarchists on Steemit, and why don't they care about violence and justice?
I appreciate the enlightening post. This is the first time I've been exposed to a structured anarchistic philosophy. I do agree with your point that privatized justice is completely possible and that most "what-ifs" can be straw man arguments. However, there are many benefits of a centralized form of law and order. Let me point to the fact that city, state, and federal law enforcement can work together as one body to fight large organized crime. If law enforcement was decentralized and fragmented, what financial benefit would insurance companies across the nation have to pool resources and fight large organized crime in only one state. What if the large organized crime unit in one city/state is larger than the privatized insurance back law enforcement?
The state is just an organized crime syndicate with a monopoly... and the mafia groups that we think of today all make their money mostly from activities that wouldn't be considered crimes at all in a stateless society. There would be no "black market," there would just be the market and everyone would operate in the open.
@piedpiper What about the billion dollar human and sex slave trafficking industry?
$32 Billion dollars to be exact.
https://www.unodc.org/documents/human-trafficking/UNVTF_fs_HT_EN.pdf
What about it? Kidnapping people, holding them against their will, and forcing them to work are violations of self-ownership and is exactly why private security companies would offer their services to victims and those that care about them. Insurance providers could also offer kidnapping insurance and rescue plans.
@monopoly-man The SEALs are paid by stealing and extorting money from citizens (taxation). They are agents of the biggest, most violent organized crime syndicate on the planet. They wouldn't exist in a stateless free market environment. More dangerous jobs would be more expensive and if the clients can't pay for it, they will have to turn to charity, crowdfunding, etc to raise the money or just accept that the job won't get done. Because kidnappings are so rare, and preventative measures are relatively cheap and easy to implement, kidnapping insurance would be cheap. At the end of the day, we are responsible for our own lives... and if I'm in a perfectly bitchy mood, I'll even go as far to say that people who refuse to take responsibility for themselves should die off, for the good of the gene pool. Natural selection is part of evolution and it ain't always pretty.
@piedpiper Before I respond, I want to clarify I am not trying to be argumentative. I see that you all have valid points. I am just interested in your potential solutions.
Now, in response to suggesting private securities and insurance companies will be willing to take on a billion dollar entity, I would like to question that suggestion by pointing to the fact that a settlement check to the family may be far cheaper than taking on a $32 billion dollar entity, especially when all of the insurance and private security firms will be individually less wealthy. With less wealth comes less resources. A thousand crowd-sourced guns will not overpower one bomb. (Probably not the best example, but just wanted to illustrate the point.)
In my experience, calculating risk is all about accounting for the worst case scenario. So, I would be interested in how private security firms and insurance companies would be willing to go to war over one individual life. Just like the United State Seals are willing to do.
@piedpiper: My point was not how the job got done, just that it does get done. The only point I was making is that ALL that money behind the Seals is willing to be spent over one human life.
I can't imagine all private security firms across an entire nation joining forces to save one life in one city who isn't even their customer.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you had some sort of logic point behind "refusing to take advantage of your life and deserving to die off" and how that relates to being kidnapped against your will? I just don't understand such a broad stroke.
Anyhow, I enjoyed the discussion. Thank you for your thoughts.
I'll be writing a post soon about how I believe Anarchy could kill innovation. I hope to discuss the topic with you there!
@piedpiper basically said it, but the only significant organized crime I'm aware of came about due to prohibition. Alcohol first, and then other drugs when alcohol prohibition ended. If profitable crime syndicates have historically been dependent on facilitating victimless crimes, I don't see how they could exist without governments that persecute victimless crimes.
Not to be repetitive... but...https://www.unodc.org/documents/human-trafficking/UNVTF_fs_HT_EN.pdf
$32 Billion dollars worth of victims.
Sure. A few thoughts.
And there you have it folks, the curious mask falls away, and the mighty strawman slayer emerges!
@zorrotmm.. You may be right. But until your hypothesis is tested, those points are speculative. Are you willing to stake your life on those assumptions?
If you and other anarchists truly believe your theories, why don't you put up a couple million dollar bond on your life and get yourself kidnapped? Why not put your money where your mouths are?
Belief without rigourous testing is simply wishing.