View Single Post
Old 02-24-2012, 10:32 AM
horhay_achoa horhay_achoa is offline
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Philly
Posts: 489
Originally Posted by Trinopus View Post
I must politely dissent from this. I don't think that any thoughtful statist demands that the anarchic society arise magically overnight.

We (both sides) often use that phrasing as a simplified short-cut. "If such a society magically arose tomorrow..." But we all know that it would take time to found and to form, and that, if it did "magically" arise, it would arise with a history back-formed. It's just a way of saying, "If we suddenly made contact with an undiscovered anarchic society in a lost city in the Himalayas" or Barsoom, or whatever. It isn't part of the actual debate.
I am not sure if this is very useful. If most statists admit that viable anarchy is not possible now, then why are we having this discussion? But that is the point...anarchy is clearly not possible with how things are today. It will take a series of small changes over an extended period of time before anarchy is able to be considered. Capitalism has its mitts deeply implanted in just about every society and individual alive. Even non-capitalist countries are playing the game, or at least being used by the game. It is going to take a very, very long time to undue the types of values and incentives that capitalism has given rise to.

As a good old-fashioned Hubert Humphrey liberal, I have no objection to "social engineering." I believe that one of the legitimate functions of education is to try to train people, from early youth, to be better citizens.

On the other hand, this makes me think of the Soviet Union attempting to create a "New Soviet Man," a socially-engineered citizen that was ready for full communism. I'm not sure... I don't know how much human nature can be tweaked...
Well, I am not sure I would call it social least not how that term is typically used to describe a top down sort of brainwashing. Part of anarchism is giving people the power to do things themselves. I think it is within human potential to restructure society from the bottom up and not the from the top down. I think we are seeing some of these values, credit unions, the buy local movement...all of these things things are steps in the right direction. Anything we can do to strengthen community is a step in the right direction. But, nobody should be forced into it. When people see that being part of a co-op has benefits, they may eventually decide to join themselves. The success of a local currency like Ithaca Hours, can inspire other places to try developing their own local currency, in turn strengthening their community. So, I would say it is less social engineering, and more leading by example.

See? I was typing faster than I was reading. Even if these small steps don't lead to a dramatic change in society, they're good ones, and so even a statist has no grave objections to them. I'll walk a ways down this path with you, even if our steps may separate later!
Sounds good!

I a degree... Human nature has, I think, already dramatically changed in the industrial age (in the industrialized countries.) Education really does better the individual.

However, I still have concerns regarding rogue individuals, and violent criminality. I think that even the most advanced and humanistic anarchistic society will have a need for a jail... is hard to know until we get there....