View Poll Results: The thread title.

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    29 56.86%
  • No

    22 43.14%
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 59

Thread: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

  1. #41
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkenAsparagus View Post
    Anarchism is the belief that no government should tell you what to do, but your neighbors should.
    If true, that seems like an oxymoron...

    Cause they are the same thing.

    Or supposed to be, anyway.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Forcing customer to purchase? What are you talking about? With sufficent force, people can take whatever they want. Furthermore, the largest PMCs could simply join and take every other firm out and then take over. Again, anarchy leads to Despotism. There is nothing stopping those with the largest amount of force from doing what they want when they want to whomever they want.
    So what you're saying is that decentralized private enterprises could ban together and form a monopoly on the use of force. How is that different from the system we currently have exactly?

    "We must ask, not whether an anarcho-capitalist society would be safe from a power grab by the men with the guns (safety is not an available option), but whether it would be safer than our society is from a comparable seizure of power by the men with the guns. I think the answer is yes. In our society, the men who must engineer such a coup are politicians, military officers, and policemen, men selected precisely for the characteristic of desiring power and being good at using it. They are men who already believe that they have a right to push other men around - that is their job. They are particularly well qualified for the job of seizing power. Under anarcho-capitalism the men in control of protection agencies are selected for their ability to run an efficient business and please their customers. It is always possible that some will turn out to be secret power freaks as well, but it is surely less likely than under our system where the corresponding jobs are labeled 'non-power freaks need not apply'." -- David Friedman

    Monopolies can form when you are able to forcibly eliminate your compeition by shooting them in the face.
    Name a monopoly that has ever formed in the existence of civilization without the aid of the state? Market competition simply will not allow monopoly to form without state intervention.


    Somalia suggests otherwise. When a power vaccum arise from a collapse of a goverment, we do not see what you proclaim arise. We see those with the power take power and execute all who get in their way.
    Somalia had an advanced market economy? Somalia was not the result of anarchism it was the result of the failure of the state. Civil war =/= anarchy.

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    The private security firm doesn't have to compete on an open market. They can simply use force to take what they want from anyone weaker than they are. If there customers try to switch, they can kill some and terrorize the rest into submission.
    A single company would not be able to obtain that amount of strength under a free market economy, market competition would not allow it. If such tyrannical policies were adopted by a company then it would empower its competitors as they would lose business while the competition would gain business.


    He has it backwards. A formal government like the U.S. treats its citizens far better than a Somali warlord.
    Somalia was the result of a failed state, it wasn't anarchy it was a civil war in which two groups were each vying for the right to state sovereignty and a monopoly on the use of force.

    Do you seriously think that every monopoly in history was state backed?
    Yes.

    Have you even heard of microsoft?
    Microsoft is a monopoly? I think someone ought to inform Apple.

  4. #44
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    So what you're saying is that decentralized private enterprises could ban together and form a monopoly on the use of force. How is that different from the system we currently have exactly?
    The citizens control who is put in charge of the current system. Your proposal has no control from the citizens. Second, the citizens get to vote on legislation that affects their lives. In your proposal, who has the guns sets the rules. In the current system we get remove people from power. In your proposal, we have to stage armed rebellions to remove PMCs.

    Name a monopoly that has ever formed in the existence of civilization without the aid of the state? Market competition simply will not allow monopoly to form without state intervention.
    Microsoft. Market competition doesn't mean squat when you can take what you what by force.

    Somalia had an advanced market economy? Somalia was not the result of anarchism it was the result of the failure of the state. Civil war =/= anarchy.
    Except that Somalia was in a state of anarchy. You have this notion people will do the right moral thing without pressures above them. I question if you were born on this planet.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  5. #45
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,868
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    so in this hypothetical, what if all the security companies simply merged to maximise profits for all the individuals involved, how would that be prevented?
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    The citizens control who is put in charge of the current system. Your proposal has no control from the citizens. Second, the citizens get to vote on legislation that affects their lives. In your proposal, who has the guns sets the rules. In the current system we get remove people from power. In your proposal, we have to stage armed rebellions to remove PMCs.
    No in my system there is no monopoly on the use of force because security is provided through decentralized private entities each competing with one another for market share which would insure that no single one would become to powerful under your system there already is a monopoly on the use of force engendered by the state, under my system one would only enter into security arrangments with these firms through voluntary contracts under your system you are forced into it and if you fail to comply with the racketeering scheme of the state you are thrown in jail.

    Microsoft.
    Microsoft is not a monopoly.

    Market competition doesn't mean squat when you can take what you what by force.
    A) The state already takes what it wants by force.

    B) If a company started acting in such a way they would lose consumers to their competitors, their competitors would grow stronger and they weaker. It just wouldn't make good business sense.

    Except that Somalia was in a state of anarchy.
    No it was in a state of civil war.

    You have this notion people will do the right moral thing without pressures above them.
    I have no illusions, which is why there will stil be a necessary for individual and collective self defense.
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 06-20-10 at 10:37 PM.

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    so in this hypothetical, what if all the security companies simply merged to maximise profits for all the individuals involved, how would that be prevented?
    Without state created barriers to entry smaller competitors would continiously be entering the market.

  8. #48
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    No in my system there is no monopoly on the use of force because security is provided through decentralized private entities each competing with one another for market share which would insure that no single one would become to powerful under your system there already is a monopoly on the use of force engendered by the state, under my system one would only enter into security arrangments with these firms through voluntary contracts under your system you are forced into it and if you fail to comply with the racketeering scheme of the state you are thrown in jail.
    What's stopping firms from colluding to take power? What's stopping them from just shooting their competition? Nothing. Your idea makes no sense in the context of how humans actually operate. When there is nothing to stop being from acting badly, they act badly. Your argument resides on the principle that people are inherently good, that firms won't collude, that they won't kill their competition. What's stopping them from shooting each other in the face? Nothing.

    Microsoft is not a monopoly.
    At the moment, no. But it was and without state support.

    A) The state already takes what it wants by force.
    And we can legislate laws to limit that. Your proposal has no method of recourse. Your proposal has no method to control groups who do not play by the rules. Your proposal is nothing more then Despotism.

    B) If a company started acting in such a way they would lose consumers to their competitors, their competitors would grow stronger and they weaker. It just wouldn't make good business sense.
    Who needs customers when we can just take their stuff? Who needs to pay for anything when we can just execute anyone who gets in our way? Who needs to even play by the rules when we have more guns then you? You think PMCs act to protect. And there's where your argument fails. Nothing is stopping PMCs from taking what they want when they want.

    No it was in a state of civil war.
    Except there was no government. Do you know what anarchy means? Unlike Civil wars between defined groups, such as a suceeding government or rebel factions, Somalia was little more then a free for all.

    I have no illusions, which is why there will stil be a necessary for individual and collective self defense.
    And why you'll get rolled over by people with more guns.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  9. #49
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Without state created barriers to entry smaller competitors would continiously be entering the market.
    And the big PMC would just execute them. What's stopping that from happening? Nothing.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  10. #50
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    And the big PMC would just execute them. What's stopping that from happening? Nothing.
    You do not need laws banning monopolies if you have laws banning the actions they could and/or would take to force competitors out of the market.

    This is, in a word, obvious.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •