gigaplex: Well, mr Rothbard, If the state didn't give us bread where would we get it from?
Rothbard: A private bakery?
gigaplex: But would it function mr Rothbard? You just can't expect me to believe your word for it!
Rothbard: Um, demand, entrepreneurship, risk, market process, verification, outcome?
gigaplex: No, no, no, I need a business plan!
Rothbard: Do I look like a baker or something?
I get mugged every day. You say, that me claiming that I should NOT be mugged is a positive claim, because it calls for a change? I don't want some metaphysical 'change'. I want the state to stop making one change after another on my body/property. Where do you see a positive claim in that?
liberty student: Knight_of_BAAWA:So please: stop blaming others for your lack of imagination. And I suppose you figured out life, the universe and everything all by yourself? Some imagination you must have.
Knight_of_BAAWA:So please: stop blaming others for your lack of imagination.
And I suppose you figured out life, the universe and everything all by yourself? Some imagination you must have.
:in before ad hom:Sigh.
Knight_of_BAAWA: gigaplex:Did I say that it was anyone else's fault? Yeah, actually. "All I got were snide comments...." So please: stop blaming others for your lack of imagination.
gigaplex:Did I say that it was anyone else's fault?
Yeah, actually. "All I got were snide comments...."
So please: stop blaming others for your lack of imagination.
Wrong. Try again.
Just because someone gives you snide comments about a topic doesn't mean that it is their fault if you get the wrong impression about the subject. If it was your responsibility to understand the subject then it can't really be their fault.
So you are trying to put words in my mouth again. Claiming that I am thinking something different even though I have said that I am not and have not even wrote what you claim I am thinking.
It's too bad you are not smart enough to be able to discuss what is actually said. The only way you have any chance of winning any argument is to twist what others say. It's rather pathetic really.
Baawa, how old are you? 16?
Mr. Karla: gigaplex: Well, mr Rothbard, If the state didn't give us bread where would we get it from? Rothbard: A private bakery? gigaplex: But would it function mr Rothbard? You just can't expect me to believe your word for it! Rothbard: Um, demand, entrepreneurship, risk, market process, verification, outcome? gigaplex: No, no, no, I need a business plan! Rothbard: Do I look like a baker or something?
Actually, Rothbard spent a great deal of time explaining examples of how market anarchy worked in "For A New Liberty". Perhaps you weren't aware this book existed? So he did exactly what you have made up above but for the unfamiliar enterprises, not bakeries. There was not a need for bakeries to be explained since they are in existence already and obviously working.
Why do you think he did this? If he, nor anyone else, presented the idea of protection agencies or showed an example of how private courts worked, if none of that information was out there (what little we have), would you still expect everyone to be an anarchist just on faith that somehow it would work out even though every time they have seen anarchy happen in their lives it has been utter chaos? If you do, you are very far removed from reality.
I am not an anarchist because the modus operandi is a consistent moral position or so I can win debates. I am an anarchist because I believe that ancap would be a more practical society that was able to solve problems better and because I believe the NET liberty would be higher. After a modus operandi is in place, how well is a person's liberty protected? That is the most important aspect of any system of government or lack of government. It's the net effect, not how it looks on paper. The net effect is the real world test. There is no better way to judge a philosphy than the real world. To favor a modus operandi with disregard to whether the net liberty is higher and whether it is practical or not is highly irresponsible and would require far less imagination and guts.
liberty student:And I suppose you figured out life, the universe and everything all by yourself?
Yes. I even came up with 42 before I read HHGTTG. Know why? Because I'm just that cool. I'm so cool that you could use my blood to induce superconductivity.
gigaplex:Actually, Rothbard spent a great deal of time explaining examples of how market anarchy worked in "For A New Liberty". Perhaps you weren't aware this book existed? So he did exactly what you have made up above but for the unfamiliar enterprises, not bakeries. There was not a need for bakeries to be explained since they are in existence already and obviously working.
So what's your problem, then? If there are functioning private companies, why could you not make the leap conceptually?
gigaplex:I was just wanting to know that there was A way that it COULD be done. Unfortunately, whenever I asked anarchists about how such and such might be done in a market anarchy, I got no answers.
read:
http://invisiblemolotov.wordpress.com/
nje5019: http://invisiblemolotov.wordpress.com/
Wow, the chaos theory book looks right up my alley. This is exactly the type of thing that I am saying we need more of and shouldn't try to avoid discussing. This is the type of thing that convinces people on the fence. This is the type of thing that an investor would need to know about as a starting point. Maybe it makes debates more challenging and maybe it takes a little more imagination but the benefits of work like this far exceed the disadvantages.Thanks for recommending it. I'll definitely be giving it a read.
No problem. Chaos Theory was the book that brought me over the fence when i considered myself a minarchist.
nje5019: No problem. Chaos Theory was the book that brought me over the fence when i considered myself a minarchist.
Well, there you go. Further proof that talking about this stuff does more for the cause :)
gigaplex: There was not a need for bakeries to be explained since they are in existence already and obviously working.
Impossible! I don't know how to run a bakery down to the last detail.
gigaplex:would you still expect everyone to be an anarchist just on faith that somehow it would work out even though every time they have seen anarchy happen in their lives it has been utter chaos?
Everytime anarchy has "happened" in my own life, I've been pretty pleased with the result. The state didn't select my wife, job, what movies I see or books I read. I go out with my friends all the time and we decide where to go and what to do without resorting the situation degrading to chaos. I'm having a hard time thinking about a chaotic situation that is not caused by or (in the case of natural disasters) amplified by gun-toting self-appointed law-bringers.
gigaplex:I am not an anarchist because the modus operandi is a consistent moral position or so I can win debates.
Moral consistency is way overrated.
gigaplex:I believe the NET liberty would be higher.
How would you measure that? The only similar property I can think that you have direct experience of is how free are you now?
gigaplex:To favor a modus operandi with disregard to whether the net liberty is higher and whether it is practical or not is highly irresponsible and would require far less imagination and guts.
And to favor an MO that someone tells you will create "Net liberty" (which does not exist) while disregarding whether it is logically and morally consistent is, well, we can see what it is, because that's the claim that monopolists of violence always make (to be fair "net happiness", "net safety" and other non-existent metrics have also been used).
So gig, how free are you now?
gigaplex: Mr. Karla: gigaplex: Well, mr Rothbard, If the state didn't give us bread where would we get it from? Rothbard: A private bakery? gigaplex: But would it function mr Rothbard? You just can't expect me to believe your word for it! Rothbard: Um, demand, entrepreneurship, risk, market process, verification, outcome? gigaplex: No, no, no, I need a business plan! Rothbard: Do I look like a baker or something? Actually, Rothbard spent a great deal of time explaining examples of how market anarchy worked in "For A New Liberty". Perhaps you weren't aware this book existed? So he did exactly what you have made up above but for the unfamiliar enterprises, not bakeries. [...]
Actually, Rothbard spent a great deal of time explaining examples of how market anarchy worked in "For A New Liberty". Perhaps you weren't aware this book existed? So he did exactly what you have made up above but for the unfamiliar enterprises, not bakeries. [...]
A. To bad you chose to discuss a bit of a joke instead of the argument I stated below. Well, your choice. The joke was about asking a praxeologist to make businessplans for a particular entreprises. I thought it would sound obviously silly. My bad. What about the rest of my previous post?
B. Ah yes, For A New Liberty. Never liked it that much, I'm more of an 'Ethics of Liberty' person. But ok, so if Rothbards Manifesto is what you are looking for, then what is this discussion about?
C. Pardon the cliche, but I believe it's all about ideas. If people think that there is some form of justified coercion, then we have to start convincing them they are wrong.
If on the other hand I was elected king, then saying: "from today it is illegal to tax. From today state-owned entities cease to exist." would not get us into an-cap. It would probably cause some sort of revolution and a new ruler, new taxes etc. Ideas first. And I think it's not a bad idea to start with: "It is bad to steal. No matter who is the crook."
There was not a need for bakeries to be explained since they are in existence already and obviously working.
So on a final note: do YOU know how to explain how a bakery works? Some other way then: "demand, entrepreneurship, risk, market process, verification, outcome"? Because if you do I would love to hear it. That would give us a glimps of what you expect from us. Only remember one thing: a businessplant does NOT explain how a business will work. It's filled with better or worse guesses that the market will verify.
gigaplex: nje5019: http://invisiblemolotov.wordpress.com/ Wow, the chaos theory book looks right up my alley. (...)Thanks for recommending it. I'll definitely be giving it a read.
Wow, the chaos theory book looks right up my alley. (...)Thanks for recommending it. I'll definitely be giving it a read.
Did you really start the topic "The burden of proof is on the Anarchists" without reading Murphy first? Jesus, we really need to place detailed background notes about ourselves. Somebody would have given you the link a couple of pages before.
PS. To bad for Robert Murphy, he published the first an-cap businessplan. He could have been rich after the end of all governments:D
Gigaplex is right to say that someone needs to come up with a precise, detailed business plan. Someone needs to run the courts, manage the police, build the roads, etc.
But the key point is that MA is not a centrally planned economy. The anarchist who proposes a private solution to courts is only giving his personal entrepreneurial solution. Fortunately, the market does not depend on the ideas of one person. All that matters is that at least one person comes up with a detailed solution. Moreover, people have the financial incentive of profits to provide ingenious solutions to managing, private courts, police, etc., so we can expect it to be done.
That being said, we should expect some concrete, detailed plans that could potentially be presented to investors.
But, as always, the market already provides these services to some degree. We already have private arbitration, private police, and private roads. Instead of looking for an abstract business plan, just look at how it's already being done.