danielmiessler.com - Latest Comments in Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

cooperati — Thu, 10 Oct 2013 22:51:43 -0000

Am I wrong or is Anarchy the absence of Social Contracts?

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

SJG1759 — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:06:29 -0000

"Socialism is a control system necessitated by the presence of severe human flaws." Socialists *ARE* human.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Dave — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:19:41 -0000

The problem with an ideal eventually leading to anarchy, is that there will always be partisans calling for that anarchy NOW. And the problem with anarchy, is that ALL humans are imperfect, and ALL humans need some education, more or less, to become properly socialized. And what is 'proper socialization' changes every generation. You need government Always. You cannot do away with it, unless you mold humanity into some new species with different vices and virtues.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

J. — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:27:34 -0000

They are both forms of government. They seek to accomplish the same goals, negotiating a social contract between majorities and minorities. They both pursue fairness. They both value the independence of the individual and the power of concerted action.

Anarchy can never be tyrannical, but socialism can. There could be a socialist king or dictator, but never an anarchical king or dictator, at least not one who oppressed anyone, so it could only be an empty title. As soon as any of the tools of oppression were used it would cease to be anarchy. Socialism uses some of the forms of oppression to accomplish it's goals, thus it can only be a transition stage, never a utopia.

A lot of anarchy would look like socialism until you pulled back the veil to see that no one was being coerced in any way.

If you aren't striving towards a utopia, I think it is a lot like being asleep.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

J. — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:14:11 -0000

Being no more against universal voting rights as the masses are too easily swayed by propaganda, the most difficult decision is how to choose your oligarchy. Right now it is still mostly inherited as the only big opportunities are available to those with huge genetic inheritances in the form of genes and trust funds. The goal is to get the wisest, not the smartest or the most connected. If a society however does not know its wisest people, it is always going to be lobotomized. I think this is the real puzzle, not whether or not to restrict the excesses of private fortunes or strive towards symbiotic self rule.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Edd — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 14:26:34 -0000

today we've figure out the opposite, that is, that no human condition is predeterminate. The responsible for forming the condition is the enviroment where one is inserted.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Tfulwood11 — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 23:36:11 -0000

How the terms Socialism and Anarchy became related
By?

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Youknowit — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 11:56:50 -0000

Socialism is a means of control by taking from those that produce and giving to specific programs aka social engineering. It depends on moral values and goals but whose?

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Daniel Miessler — Thu, 06 May 2010 16:55:08 -0000

Fair enough; I don't either. So all you do is stop when you reach the appropriate balance of centralized and decentralized control.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

joe — Thu, 06 May 2010 16:52:52 -0000

unless, of course, you don't believe in anarchy.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

nico — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 02:17:39 -0000

anarchy is the opposite of socialism. and it smells worse. anyone i know that calls themselves an anarchist is failing on all these levels. so quick to jump to the end result! humans arent decent. starbucks is anarchy on a grand scale. you want to be stepping over even more bums and get stabbed for your shoes you can do it now! that anarchy exists every night in the city streets already. it does not work. period. treat everyone with the respect you deserve. smashing windows out of small businesses is naive and counters these 'ideals' sloppily scribbled (and misspelled) all over my neighborhood SMALL PRIVATELY OWNED BUSINESSES! i love the stupid 'vegan anarchy' graffiti too. really really fucking up the system. HUMANS WILL NEVER BE DECENT UNTIL THEY HAVE A REASON TO BE. if a kid has no hope of ever knowing what its like to own their own home they are so willing to stomp my flower beds every chance they get for the fuck of it.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

bob — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:12:24 -0000

LOL. epic FAIL

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

scooter123 — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 08:44:08 -0000

I think you are working with an extreme view of libertarianism. Most libertarians favor a government with a limited presence. Your use of the term libertarian here seem to indicate the need/want to abolish the government which really isn't the case. It's not that cut and dry.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

NH — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:32:51 -0000

Well this explains why you are for Obama... and should never have Ron Paul's face anyplace on your blog..

UGH

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

bqcv jxdrgkhym — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:12:33 -0000

bjyx aqjprm evmb eahoxpzkb btixe hwgolyipb mecudapz

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Maxo — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:36:20 -0000

So I've thought about it and would like to offer some clarification on my views.
Anarchy, as it relates to government, simply means the lack of government. It doesn't have any specific meaning beyond that. It doesn't mean people do or don't get along.
Socialism is not specific either. It only means that in general people need to work together for the common good. There are many ways to accomplish that. You can do it through a totalitarian state like most implementations of communism. You could do it through a representative democracy, where people elect officials to decide what is best for the public, like we do. It could also exist in a Utopian anarchy, like we have been discussing.
Most people I have met that describe themselves as socialists would like to see the third version.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Maxo — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:11:11 -0000

@ Daniel

Maybe we are on two different pages. I've always looked at socialism as an ideal. The usual argument against socialism is that it could never work. I think that argument is invalid because it misses the point, and it usually end with the conclusion, "...so we should never try." But maybe you are right. Socialism may be action to work towards the unachievable realism of anarchy. ...

@ Carl

I took your comment to be the typical response towards socialism, humans are greedy, always will be, so we might as well give up on getting along and use the Social Darwinistic ideal of survival of the fittest, man benefits the most if he fights each other for his own personal gain and the best man wins.
Most socialists realize that we will never "just get along", but are committed to fighting those who work to make sure we aren't just getting along.

To me, the right balance is a fair playing field where the only obstacle to success is yourself. When artificial factors inhibit success, our society loses great people to oppression. How many geniuses go on to push drugs because they were born in to the wrong family, went to the wrong schools, and where constantly belittled and shot down by those who looked at him/her and told them they where a loser?

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Jon Robinson — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:08:25 -0000

What evidence do you have that socialism keeps negative aspects of human behavior in check? Why do human flaws necessitate a "control system"? Are there beneficiaries of socialism? I think not. Anyone that benefits from state handouts only does so at the expense of whomever the state stole from. The state doesn't produce anything, it can only steal. Any such system set up to regulate humans can only be run by other imperfect humans at the expense of personal liberty. I would argue that socialism exacerbates human flaws and keeps all the wonderful human attributes from flourishing. Most of the world doesn't have a legacy or tradition of individuality like the West, but that doesn't mean they need a socialist state to rule over them to lift them out of the darkness, so to speak.

The idea doesn't lead to peaceful interaction between humans, mainly because it involves one set of "smarter" humans telling another set how to live. If the "dumb" humans don't cooperate they get killed or thrown in prison. History shows this. Socialism is no path to liberty. If you leave humans to themselves, good things happen. There will still be bad people doing bad things, but a free market will offer better means of protection and minimize the effects of forceful intervention (crime) over time. A socialist state (any state) is a vehicle for bad people to do bad things. In fact it gives them a monopoly to do so.

The argument against socialism and central planning is made much better by Frederic Bastiat in "The Law" or in "Economic Harmonies". Ludwig von Mises wrote a book called "Socialism", but I haven't read it yet. "Human Action" is highly recommended.

oh, and for passersby...anarchy means no state, not no law. Private law enforcement and judges would do a better job at protecting you than the state monopoly does now. Checkout "Chaos Theory" by Robert Murphy or "Democracy: the God that Failed" by Hoppe. Also, "For a New Liberty" by Rothbard is good.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Carl M — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:49:48 -0000

@Maxo,

I understand what Daniel wrote, and I understand what you wrote: "To me, and most socialists I have met, socialism is the ideal of working towards anarchy. Not anarchy in the sense of no government, but anarchy in the sense of not needing government."

MY statement that greed is a part of the human condition was meant to be understood to be a statement that I do not believe that we will ever (in our lifetimes ... and probably not EVER) reach a point that humanity without government is better overall than humanity WITH government.

I agree completely that humanity as a whole would be better if everyone lived as you do (doing the "right" thing always) and I too try to live up to this ideal. But, I don't pretend that everyone will ever live like this. Keep in mind that the vast majority of people DO live like this (some of them do so because we have laws .. others do so because they understand that it is the best for humanity as a whole -- call it the Golden Rule if you like). But, that small minority that doesn't behave themselves WITH laws is not going to behave themselves WITHOUT laws. It's just not going to happen. We will ALWAYS need rules and enforcers of those rules.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Daniel Miessler — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:05:37 -0000

@Maxo

Actually, I kind of just stumbled on the whole "intermediate step concept". I hadn't made that connection before my late night walk last night.

Are you sure we're synced on that? I'm saying socialism ISN'T an ideal, and that the opposite is, but that socialism enables its opposite.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Maxo — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 08:52:14 -0000

I'm glad to see that you have about the same understanding of socialism as I do. Most people do not understand it at all, like the above poster. Socialism is an ideal. Ideals are just that, ideals. There is no expectation that they will actually be reached, and there are many different ways to work towards that ideal.
To me, and most socialists I have met, socialism is the ideal of working towards anarchy. Not anarchy in the sense of no government, but anarchy in the sense of not needing government.
This is an important distinction, because it makes living the life of a socialist a good thing for any society. For example, I don't need a police officer to check the road to make sure I am driving safely, because I do it anyways. I don't do it because it is the law, and driving safely and obeying the law are not always the same thing, but because it is the "right" thing to do.
When you are being considerate to others, and contributing to your community voluntarily you are eliminating the need to actually have a government, and are thus working towards the socialist ideal. You are working towards the ideal of not needing a government because everyone is voluntarily supporting their community.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

Carl M — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 08:08:46 -0000

If we've learned ANYTHING from history, we've learned that greed is a part of the human condition. To assume that this will ever change is something I can't do.

Re: Socialism, Anarchy and Ideal Government

MII — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:22:41 -0000

oo, another who sees...