I. Anarchy

After the inter period... Well relatively democratic system with social equality and justice would probably be the best possible thing to emerge... As the light at the end of the tunnel... And I'm aware that full democracy will never be achieved and will stay in borders of pure theory(Unless if we as a specie drastically change in what I reasonably doubt will ever happen as we're in general the same crooked and greedy animals we were in the Dark Age) but atleast some few steps CAN be made.

Cool. Interesting that you see it as an intermediary while I always envisioned it as an eventual goal. Like the light at the end of a tunnel. Two questions: 1) What do you see on the other side of the "inter period"? 2) There are many flavors of anarchism being proposed (primarily differences in economic theory). What interests you?

I like that you admit imperfection. I think a lot of the people arguing just get hung up on absolutes.

@rmcdaniel423
I don't claim anarchy is perfect do be a permanent system, I look at it more as the inter period and tool to end any malicious/repressive/absolutis t form of reign... And I am nice... In future please use the reply option, so that I could be aware of the feedback from you...

So then, help educate me. You already know what I favor (stateless, free market, non-aggression principle). From this point forward, on this particular channel, I will no longer make comments about what I would like to see. I promise.

Explain what you would like to see. What principles do you value? Help me properly understand the terms you may use. Show me what we may have in common and where we differ. Allow me to ask questions. I want to hear from others too. Be nice.

Corporations did not come to "such high level of control" under the system I propose. That happened under the current system which I, like you, do not favor. They did so because of collusion with governments. Corporatocracy happens NOW. It can't happen in a true free market.

The punks I refer to are the ones who just rabble rouse and vandalize without a true sense of ethics. I support activists when they make principled resistance against the state. It's the riots that hurt our cause.

@rmcdaniel423
And the guy was right... "corporatocracy", well how else to call a system where the corporations came even to such high level of control as literally waging wars?

@rmcdaniel423
Dude when democracy fails and authority becomes a reign of terror there's simply no other way... You could become a "violent punk who does nothing but rage against authority" or stay passive as any other cattle waiting to be slaughtered(metaphorically of course, but unfortunately sometimes even literally)... Inaction is the worst crime in that case if you ask me... If you don't fight for your freedom then you DON'T DESERVE IT; Simple as that...

Oh and stop mass spamming, one or two comments at a time to spew your propaganda for a world where private buisnesses own everything.

What you advocate isn't even an anarchy. What you propose is a false liberty, the cold hard reality would be that your system would only value the wealthy and the worker and everyone else would have to steal and kill to get by.

We don't need a coercive government, we could all be living like Norway. That's miles beyond the stagnant private owned dog eat dog hell you're suggesting.

The word "anarchy" scares a lot of people because of the violent punks who do nothing but rage against authority. They give an otherwise simple philosophical concept a falsely bad image. And the collusion of some industries with government protectionism gives capitalism a bad name. And the terrible dictators of the past give socialism a bad name. It all boils down to:

liberty minus law = chaos
law plus coercive government = tyranny
liberty plus non-aggression principle = evolution of society