You may read the subject and replace "anti-statism" with "libertarianism", because I believe that most of modern libertarianism is a political philosophy that emphasizes a decreased role of the modern nation-state. It matters because there is a difference between truly general concepts and concepts specific to our time and place in history, the current notion of a "nation" being something specific to 2011.

If I were to characterize libertarianism I would say that it is "voluntary government" and not 'lack' of government. That latter would be actual anarchism. I say voluntary government because libertarianism believes in:
- freedom of association (FoA) and
- weakened national powers

The FoA point is where the devil in the details appears. My ability to freely associate implies that I can opt into organizations that require a relinquishing of certain freedoms within the context of my participation. Should I choose to "opt-out" then my contract should have a clause that would dictate what I am entitled or not entitled to, but I have all of my natural freedoms back. This would start with basically a hyperactive and overbearing HoA, and ultimately result in micro-governments. You can always leave, but that's not to say that leaving doesn't have penalties. How similar is this to the modern nation-state of the United States?

Well it's not identical, that's true. There's a valid argument that I can not "opt-out" of citizenship in the US. People in Texas have tried this, lolz. I can apply for, and accept, citizenship in another nation, then replace my current US citizenship with that. However, I cannot create my own nation-state and therein lies the key difference. Libertarians, unlike anarchists, still accept some role of a truly national government, and the legal system & national defense are common examples. So the ideal libertarian national government borderlines on an international court. Point granted there - there is a coherent vision that can come of this all. I just wish that libertarians would actually articulate said vision.

I should add as a footnote that I was drunk as a motherfucka when I wrote this.

3/4/2012 1:37:29 AM

as long as i get:

free medical care
the government defining private social issues like bc/abortion/marriage
state sponsored education
free food
government housing
state controlled r&d

i'll be just fine with whatever we get. 16 trillion in debt. who cares. we need to pretend we can pay for these things for everyone

3/4/2012 5:47:23 PM

hell yea, let's not educate the populace!

3/4/2012 6:52:54 PM

^ it seems to work for pack_bryan...

3/4/2012 7:22:48 PM

Quote :

"If I were to characterize libertarianism I would say that it is "voluntary government" and not 'lack' of government. That latter would be actual anarchism."

I read your whole post, but this is where you get tripped up. There is no such thing as a voluntary government, otherwise it wouldn't be called government, it would just be called, I don't know, voluntarily working together. What makes a government a government is that it has a monopoly on force.

I don't think there's really a better explanation of this concept than Murray Rothbard's Anatomy of the State (http://mises.org/easaran/chap3.asp):

Quote :

"We must, therefore, emphasize that "we" are not the government; the government is not "us." The government does not in any accurate sense "represent" the majority of the people. But, even if it did, even if 70 percent of the people decided to murder the remaining 30 percent, this would still be murder and would not be voluntary suicide on the part of the slaughtered minority. No organicist metaphor, no irrelevant bromide that "we are all part of one another," must be permitted to obscure this basic fact. If, then, the State is not "us," if it is not "the human family" getting together to decide mutual problems, if it is not a lodge meeting or country club, what is it? Briefly, the State is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular, it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion. While other individuals or institutions obtain their income by production of goods and services and by the peaceful and voluntary sale of these goods and services to others, the State obtains its revenue by the use of compulsion; that is, by the use and the threat of the jailhouse and the bayonet. Having used force and violence to obtain its revenue, the State generally goes on to regulate and dictate the other actions of its individual subjects. One would think that simple observation of all States through history and over the globe would be proof enough of this assertion; but the miasma of myth has lain so long over State activity that elaboration is necessary."

What you refer to as "micro governments" would not be governments at all. Yes, they would perform some of the same functions as the current government, but they would do so in the framework of the marketplace and would be forced to compete with other agencies. They would not be permitted to unilaterally pass a law and incarcerate anyone that failed to follow the law. Contracts would have limited usefulness, as contracts are only valid as long as both parties consent to them.

[Edited on March 4, 2012 at 8:01 PM. Reason : ]

3/4/2012 8:00:00 PM

i know. private schools always score lower than public schools

what would we do without the wake county school board. our poor souls would never learn the things we need to survive in this world.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. i just couldn't hold it in.


liberal countries rock:




[Edited on March 4, 2012 at 9:15 PM. Reason : ,]

3/4/2012 8:55:15 PM

poor people don't deserve an education?

ok, fine.

how's the country going to turn out when a vast number of people can't afford an education?

don't give me that voucher horseshit, either.

[Edited on March 4, 2012 at 9:19 PM. Reason : ]

3/4/2012 9:18:16 PM

The amount people pay in taxes would cover a lot of education. Property taxes and sales taxes dig deep into the working poor among us. Keep in mind that the poor are purposefully excluded from many of the tax breaks we in the middle class enjoy.

We don't need government run schools to obtain educations for the fraction of children at risk for going without.

As Europeans have discovered, vouchers are a great way to equitably distribution services for society. Far better than the current system, where the rich pay for great educations and the poor suffer in failed government schools.

3/4/2012 9:28:45 PM

if we're going to do this, we're going to do it right - we can't have the fascist government collecting taxes to redistribute to people for school, LOLOLOL

3/4/2012 9:30:33 PM

^^lol but you weren't allowed to talk about vouchers because obviously obamauniversity is the only possibly answer here

^you're right. only social ownership of all things and massive debt pretending we own anything at all will allow us to survive.

i submit to your overwhelming argument...

lol

[Edited on March 4, 2012 at 9:38 PM. Reason : ,]

3/4/2012 9:31:49 PM

[Edited on March 4, 2012 at 9:42 PM. Reason : lol, this one is funnier]

3/4/2012 9:41:14 PM

Quote :

"I read your whole post, but this is where you get tripped up. There is no such thing as a voluntary government, otherwise it wouldn't be called government, it would just be called, I don't know, voluntarily working together. What makes a government a government is that it has a monopoly on force."

This is about definition. Fine, institutions that lack the power of force are not government. We'll say that and move on. Nothing about my positions are changed by switching definitions.

Quote :

"They would not be permitted to unilaterally pass a law and incarcerate anyone that failed to follow the law."

Well, they could have a "jail" where people could leave, but forfeit whatever privilege granted to them through participation in that specific mini-state.

What we're talking about at this point is a specialized national government, almost a single purpose national government that only maintains a legal system and prevents warring and thuggery between the mini-states themselves and with foreign entities.

It could work, and it could be better than what we have now. Absolutely. But my gripe is that this isn't what I hear coming out of libertarian's mouths. And it's likely that libertarians won't agree with what I'm describing in the first place.

3/4/2012 10:16:00 PM

isn't it interesting how anti-libertariansim = modern liberalism

see a religion is an organization that exists mostly outside of most govt influence and control

this is why all the democrats and karl marxists and communists get their panties in a knot and hate it. because they don't have complete domination over it like they do with women and latinos and black americans.

and this is why you get insane retards like ^^ attacking it

it's one of the last spheres outside of total govt control. so it makes sense why the church of statism with it's bed fellows of the church of militant atheism wants to take it down.

3/5/2012 1:33:33 PM

Quote :

"As Europeans have discovered, vouchers are a great way to equitably distribution services for society."

They have also discovered that single payer public healthcare is a shitload cheaper than what we have.

So do we trust the Europeans or not?

3/5/2012 1:59:50 PM

the theory behind single payor is that the single payor can crush the reimbursement rates way down because providers wont have anywhere else to go to get paid. if you're gonna go that route you'd be better off to just skip the single payor middle man and use price controls to set standard pricing at a level where people can pay out of pocket. Thereby creating affordable care and eliminating the needless inefficiencies in collecting taxes and then sending them out to providers.

3/5/2012 3:55:10 PM

am I the only one that keeps reading the title as anti-semitism?

3/5/2012 4:09:49 PM

Quote :

"isn't it interesting how anti-libertariansim = modern liberalism see a religion is an organization that exists mostly outside of most govt influence and control this is why all the democrats and karl marxists and communists get their panties in a knot and hate it. because they don't have complete domination over it like they do with women and latinos and black americans. and this is why you get insane retards like ^^ attacking it it's one of the last spheres outside of total govt control. so it makes sense why the church of statism with it's bed fellows of the church of militant atheism wants to take it down."

this is one of the greatest unintentionally funny posts I have ever seen

3/5/2012 4:19:06 PM

sandra fluke is anti semenist that's for sure

3/5/2012 9:27:44 PM

I too would prefer price controls to single payer. Take the best part of the Japanese system, price controls, and combine it with the best part of the American system, government insurance coverage for the poor. Scrap the rest. Sure, this will force the rich to suffer under the same low-price care the rest of us get, but they can always go overseas.

3/5/2012 9:35:20 PM

my problem with anti-statism:

#OCCUPYCHICAGO will be the focal point of this global spiritual insurrection… 50,000 of us will converge on the windy city and confront the G8 and NATO leaders with an ultimatum. We will set up impromptu encampments throughout the city and wage a full-spectrum memewar backed up by new tactics of anarchic swarming. Our militant in-your-face nonviolence will inspire thousands of towns, cities and campuses around the world to rise up in solidarity just like they did last October.

This is a worldwide, multi-front mutiny against the way our economic and military leaders are running the world.

3/5/2012 9:39:05 PM