quadibloc on April 13, 2011, 01:25:46 pm
Might might not be right but it usually wins, so whats the difference?
Well, there's always the chance of persuading third parties to involve themselves in the dispute...

GlennWatson on April 13, 2011, 01:52:17 pm
Might might not be right but it usually wins, so whats the difference?
Well, there's always the chance of persuading third parties to involve themselves in the dispute...

Then you don't have enough might.

GlennWatson on April 13, 2011, 03:14:16 pm
I just realized something.  AnCap libertarians are idealists, naive idealists.  You guys are like liberal communists.  You don't take into account human nature.

Its sweet really.

sam on April 13, 2011, 04:12:30 pm
I just realized something.  AnCap libertarians are idealists, naive idealists.  You guys are like liberal communists.  You don't take into account human nature.

Some anarchists are idealists - but no more so than the statists who imagine the US government will defeat it enemies by winning their hearts and minds, no more so than the state department and the counter insurgency “experts” at the pentagon, no more so than all those progressives who imagine, not withstanding the rape and sexual mutilation of Lara Logan, that if only Islamic states had democracy, they would vote progressive rather than Islamic.  According to the progressives, we only have to be nice to Muslims and give them the opportunity to express their love for us, and they will do so.

Most anarchists, like myself, expect bad behavior in an anarchic society to be dealt with by vigilantes, militias, heroes, and rentacops.  We are not idealists.  Vigilantes, gun toting heroes, and rentacops are suspiciously absent from this comic strip, but it is implied that they are not totally nonexistent.

Archonix on April 13, 2011, 05:16:18 pm
Not all police no, but there is still a lot of just following orders in their culture, as in enforcing laws any sane person would see as wrong. Gotta fix that someday. Not today though.

This is why I miss traditional British policing. Instead of just following orders and not knowing the community you serve, you had the neighbourhood bobby who scared the children into behaving themselves and knew when to let things slide.

Unfortunately, thanks to certain "incentives" that form part of our obligation to the EU, such traditional policing no longer exists and has been replaced with a continental-style, paramilitary police force arranged around large, remote, centralised police headquarters buildings. The traditional constabulary is gone, existing in name only, and if you see a bobby on the beat then you must either be hallucinating or mistaking a PCSO for a "real" policeman. And the only place you'll see those hats now are at official functions. The police officer of today has little in common with the policeman of just 20 years ago.

Might might not be right but it usually wins, so whats the difference?
Well, there's always the chance of persuading third parties to involve themselves in the dispute...

Then you don't have enough might.

If all you have is a hammer...

Alliances are an innate part of human nature. You gain "might" by either having the biggest gun, or having the most friends. If all you're going to do is wave your big gun around, you aren't going to make many friends, and sooner or later someone who can make friends is going to come along with a few dozen of them and show you what your "might" is worth.

Or, to put it another way, he will gain might by involving third parties.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2011, 05:19:58 pm by Archonix »

quadibloc on April 13, 2011, 07:09:11 pm
Or, to put it another way, he will gain might by involving third parties.
And my point was my odds of being successful in doing that are improved if I'm in the "right". That's why right matters as well as might, even if it doesn't matter as much as might.

Also, I could cite the studies that show animals are at an advantage when defending their own territory, as opposed to intruding into another one's territory.

The good guys do not always win. But they do have a slight edge.

J Thomas on April 13, 2011, 10:45:27 pm
Or, to put it another way, he will gain might by involving third parties.
And my point was my odds of being successful in doing that are improved if I'm in the "right". That's why right matters as well as might, even if it doesn't matter as much as might.

Your odds of getting third parties involved also go up the more loot you can offer them. Which is more effective?

Quote
Also, I could cite the studies that show animals are at an advantage when defending their own territory, as opposed to intruding into another one's territory.

You fight harder the more you need it. Easier to back off than take wounds for something you don't need much.

I noticed this with undergraduate math programs. Math departments would fight hard to be the only campus source for general calculus classes. They would let physics departments teach their own advanced calculus classes -- in unrigorous sloppy ways that are good enough for physicists -- but every student had to take beginning classes from the math department. Because that was theirs and they would not let anybody take it away from them.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2011, 08:15:38 am by J Thomas »

mellyrn on April 14, 2011, 08:10:33 am
Quote
I just realized something.  AnCap libertarians are idealists, naive idealists.  You guys are like liberal communists.  You don't take into account human nature.

Its sweet really.

Ah, another Hobbesian, who thinks "human nature" is "nasty, brutish and solitary", that humans cooperate only under threat of force, and never out of, well, human nature.

And, yet again, no acknowledgment in the first person.  Hey, GlennWatson, so it's true of you, at least, that you'll rape, plunder and kill just as soon as you think there are no cops to fear?

happycrow on April 14, 2011, 08:22:39 am
History demonstrates, time and time again, that in doing so, the third party becomes the governing power.  Whether it's the Saxons in the north of what we now call Germany, or various Native American peoples being "clever" by exploiting those crazy white people to do their fighting for them.

I have a strong preference not to deal with government.  That preference doesn't mean that Hobbes is wrong.  Unless the customary practices governing a society are strong enough (both physically and 'morally') to counteract it, in the absence of a leviathan, there is every reason to suspect family/tribal warfare, running feuds, and vigilante 'justice.'  Which may in fact be just, but may also be a case of 'let's just shut them up.'

J Thomas on April 14, 2011, 08:32:38 am
Quote
I just realized something.  AnCap libertarians are idealists, naive idealists.  You guys are like liberal communists.  You don't take into account human nature.

Its sweet really.

Ah, another Hobbesian, who thinks "human nature" is "nasty, brutish and solitary", that humans cooperate only under threat of force, and never out of, well, human nature.

And, yet again, no acknowledgment in the first person.  Hey, GlennWatson, so it's true of you, at least, that you'll rape, plunder and kill just as soon as you think there are no cops to fear?

My own experience is that very often people react mostly to their personal short-run situation, without much thought to the long run. I do it myself a lot.

Like, I drive an old car that gets only moderate gas mileage. To fit my beliefs I should get a Prius or something. But I look at how much a good car costs, and how much I'd save buying gasoline, and I get this gut feeling that I have better uses for my money.

It's possible that when a whole lot of people all act in their short-run interest, that market forces will arise that will fulfill everybody's long-run needs, and those forces will arise in a timely fashion so that we don't get any big disruptions.

It's even possible that markets respond to government intervention as damage and route around it, automatically fulfilling long-run needs anyway.

But I tend to doubt it.

So my guess is that when we get a collection of AnCap societies, they will run into various problems which do not solve themselves. And human beings will come up with solutions or palliatives. Different AnCap societies will come up with different solutions that have different side effects. Some AnCap societies will be more pleasant to live in than others. Given mobility, some sovs will move to the places they like best.

If there are theoretical AnCaps today who believe that AnCap societies will automatically solve all their problems, without anybody having to think about it, and the automatic solutions will be in some way ideal, I believe those particular individuals to be naive.

But if some theoretical troll comes along and says that no AnCap society can work because it will inevitably develop existential problems that nobody can solve, I will tend to believe he is a troll.

quadibloc on April 14, 2011, 09:29:31 am
If there are theoretical AnCaps today who believe that AnCap societies will automatically solve all their problems, without anybody having to think about it, and the automatic solutions will be in some way ideal, I believe those particular individuals to be naive.

But if some theoretical troll comes along and says that no AnCap society can work because it will inevitably develop existential problems that nobody can solve, I will tend to believe he is a troll.
So you're not going to give me any advice on which way to bet, are you?

I'm willing to accept that AnCap societies will find ways to solve their problems; however, I suspect that one can't rely on those being clever solutions that remain wholly within AnCap in every case - sometimes they'll have to compromise their principles a little. On the other hand, since abuse of market power is said to be dealt with by the threat of direct theft of property by the masses, I'm no longer quite sure what those principles are, since they're apparently not Libertarianism but without the pale shadow of a government that Ayn Rand postulated.

On the one hand, getting one's opponent in a debate to pin down the details of his viewpoint - or to point out that he hasn't - is a pretty essential step in ensuring a debate is not an exercise in the generation of hot air.

On the other hand, to the extent my interest is not so much in debunking AnCap, but in pointing out where, even if it is virtuous and desirable, the arguments presented in its favor are likely to be perceived as lacking... saying "look, guys, you're skipping over this point, which scares the willies out of a lot of people, and you really ought to know that perfectly well" is legitimate too.

Asking AnCap advocates to start making sense is not trolling.

spudit on April 14, 2011, 09:53:22 am
I like this thread, good idea Holt, and despite my own blatherings early on it's mostly staying on or near topic.

I will start a similar one in talk amongst yourselves, where it belongs, since we haven't mentioned the strip much lately. One based on my theory of all this anarchistic and government free zone stuff happening on a small scale all the time, people at a bus stop, scout troops, any random group but stalling out before it grows to let's say the scale of thousands. Why is that? I've read we can't get our minds around more than a few hundred people at a time, some old tribal hardwiring thing. Dunno.

So, in the strip, are the Cerians rich because they are left alone or despite being left alone, the UW being in the business of "protecting" people and all.   

Vote Early and Vote Often
for EFT
have you voted today?

J Thomas on April 14, 2011, 10:18:37 am
If there are theoretical AnCaps today who believe that AnCap societies will automatically solve all their problems, without anybody having to think about it, and the automatic solutions will be in some way ideal, I believe those particular individuals to be naive.

But if some theoretical troll comes along and says that no AnCap society can work because it will inevitably develop existential problems that nobody can solve, I will tend to believe he is a troll.

So you're not going to give me any advice on which way to bet, are you?

You mean about the odds for being in the right versus having might? What are you betting on?

Quote
I'm willing to accept that AnCap societies will find ways to solve their problems; however, I suspect that one can't rely on those being clever solutions that remain wholly within AnCap in every case - sometimes they'll have to compromise their principles a little.

Very often human beings are a little bit stupid and do compromise their principles, even when they could have found a way to live up to them. Sure, I'd expect that to happen in real AnCap societies too, and the details would be different in different AnCap societies. OK, people fall somewhat short of their ideals. So what?

Quote
On the other hand, since abuse of market power is said to be dealt with by the threat of direct theft of property by the masses, I'm no longer quite sure what those principles are, since they're apparently not Libertarianism but without the pale shadow of a government that Ayn Rand postulated.

Let's leave stupid Rand out of it.

The ZAP is like a guide to conscience. It doesn't tell you in any detail how to behave. Like, say somebody lies down in the road because of some problem he has with something, and you want to pass him but you can't get by. If you run over him you are aggressing against him. If you drag him out of the way you're aggressing on him. But he is keeping you from using the road, he is aggressing on you. Does he have a right to lie down on the road? Why not? The ZAP doesn't say. All the details are left to be sorted out. I'd figure the ZAP might remind you that when you do something that inconveniences a lot of other people, you might want to notice how important your justifications are for that.

Quote
On the one hand, getting one's opponent in a debate to pin down the details of his viewpoint - or to point out that he hasn't - is a pretty essential step in ensuring a debate is not an exercise in the generation of hot air.

People don't necessarily want to debate you about AnCap. They might get annoyed when you try. At this point AnCap is more like a religion than not. There are theologians who have jesuitical arguments why it has to inevitably work, why there is no possible way for it to fail, but that isn't central, the central thing is that they want to believe and want to live in a way that would make it work.

They have no more need to know all the details of how an AnCap society would work than ancient persecuted Christians needed to know how a Christian society should work.

Quote
On the other hand, to the extent my interest is not so much in debunking AnCap, but in pointing out where, even if it is virtuous and desirable, the arguments presented in its favor are likely to be perceived as lacking... saying "look, guys, you're skipping over this point, which scares the willies out of a lot of people, and you really ought to know that perfectly well" is legitimate too.

If an AnCap society gets established somewhere, it won't be because everybody was logically convinced that it had to work.

Quote
Asking AnCap advocates to start making sense is not trolling.

It doesn't have to be.

It probably isn't the first time.

And yet, somebody who keeps asking the same people the same question because he hopes to get a different answer -- is it possible he might be trolling himself?

Holt on April 14, 2011, 10:57:55 am
Ya know thinking on it. I think Ceres might just be an example of a place where things would work out no matter who was in charge. Sat on a strategic travel point that provides a good flow of outside wealth along with its own easily accessed mineral wealth.
As such corps would be more than happy to come along and develop the region and typically will have little interest in policing the population that colonises the area any more than they absolutely have to. Any serious troublemakers would quickly be eliminated by the corps to ensure profits aren't affected.

spudit on April 14, 2011, 11:06:02 am
Troll, a monster under a bridge, is also a verb.
To troll, to drag along behind a boat in hopes a fish will bite it.
I got me a list.
Vote Early and Vote Often
for EFT
have you voted today?