Will the establishment eventually lose?

If I had to bet, I'd say no. Although I do see them weakening somewhat over the coming decades.

 

Anarchy is simply the absence of the state. Nothing more, nothing less. And as the state is clearly the most dysfunctional and dangerous institution in human history, with thousands of years worth of failures and enormities attached to its name, there can be little doubt among enlightened minds that the peaceful abolition of this institution would be to the great benefit of humanity.

 

Anarchy was the norm throughout 95% of human existence. The state only emerged in conjunction with agriculture about 10,000 years ago. So clearly anarchy is not only viable, but the most successful and sustainable form of human organization that's ever existed.

Not government per se, but the state. The state was created by the elites, for the elites, and of the elites, and has remained that way up until the present. Therefore, any society with a state will necessarily have an establishment composed of elites.

After 10,000 years of unrelenting statism, returning to anarchy would indeed present serious difficulties. That is why the only reasonable path towards statelessness would be through general enlightenment. In the meantime, however, we can move towards statelessness by emphasizing decentralization and localized government.

 

The establishment may be defeated and replaced by a different establishment. There will always be something "established" All we can do is hope that what is "established" is sensible to "We The People"

I don't mind an "elite" of people who are there because they worked hard, demonstrated capabilities and high moral values. Not because they inherited some "right". This is a movable elite that is populated by nothing other than individual merits.

I don't see any viability in anarchy. I don't even see any substance in it.

 

Can you imagine if all people had received the same education - how different the world would be. Right now we have a big bunch of sheep who ingest the Koolaid without knowing - never mind questioning - what they are ingesting.

 

Anything is possible and in the scope of the entire world I think its inevitable that there will be societies that are much more liberty minded, where the people reject authoritarian impositions and take responsibility for their own lives liberty and property. In the coming couple of decades its likely there will be such revolutionary changes in all aspects of technology that human society will be radically different, to the point of changing humanity in significant ways. If Kurzweil's "Singularity" comes to pass, everything will be very different, including how societies are organized.

 

Anarchy* has existed in the past and exists in many places and forms today so it is a very viable possibility.

*Defined as a system of societal cooperation the necessarily respects property rights, eschews the use of force except in defense of property rights and individual liberty. This is a system of rules that are enforced by the people on an individual level, without a ruling elite. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be any heirarchies, only that they would have to be voluntary.

 

I think it’s more like peaches. People who have only experienced the equivalent freedom of an immature, hard, green fruit don’t care much for peaches.

Those who have experienced a peach picked slightly green and allowed to ripen under controlled conditions tend to continue consuming them. I’d compare this to social democracy or our US government.

Ah, but then there is the fruit allowed to come to full maturity on the tree under a hot daytime sun and cool nights. People who have eaten one of these no longer are satisfied with the picked green fruit.

Hence, the true anarchist. An individual who’s tasted enough freedom to want nothing less, only more.

If anarchy is abhorrent, it’s because it isn’t understood. Or it is understood but rejected because the individual wants to rule or is too lazy (or immoral) to rule themselves.

 

Different people with similar raw intelligence can read and be taught the exact same information and come to very different conclusions about it. The problem isn't just education. It's honesty, and there is too much dishonesty on both sides.

 

True but for many it’s a great way to get revenge on Mummy & Daddy for being nasty and controlling when you were a little thing.

 

These concentrations were created by radical public policy and can be curbed by public policy. All we need to do is support those attempting to undo the bad policy. Albeit the elite are telling everyone that changing current radical policy (anti-trust, criminal law, business practice, et al) is radical.

Leveling the playing field doesn’t mean giving anyone anything other than the same set of rules to play the game.

 

There are two ways to find poverty too much government and too little. Too little and thieves break in and steal and destroy, too much and there is nothing left for the thieves to take. There is a happy medium. Finding it is fairly easy keeping it is all but impossible. People start thinking they can use the government to redress the cosmic balance, poverty, or what ever or worse that government can be wielded to create a perfect world. Utopians are the ultimate destroyers.

 

Unfortunately many human beings are unruly bastards who steal and pillage if not kept in check and ultimately that requires a state of sorts. If human beings were perfect we would need no government for we could adequately and by choice govern ourselves, but we are not only not perfect we aren't even remotely perfectible. Perfection you see requires omniscience; that we might understand everything we see; omnipresence that we might see everything; and omnipotence that we might fix that which is not perfect, now in that lies enough paradoxes to keep you occupied for years if not decades.

 

While this is true to some degree much of what seems to be dishonesty is not actually dishonesty many people simply don't know what logical fallacy is or what constitutes a valid argument. Since the masses are so ignorant Politicians and the MSM engage in a daily cacophony of bad argument and fallacy. These are the dishonest ones as many of these people - Journalists for sure - know they are spewing garbage yet they do it anyway.

 

Can’t argue with most of that. I do maintain the majority don’t give anarchy a fair shake. Anarchy can have rules and protect the individual in the absence of rulers. It requires more personal responsibility than most can bear though.

The statement utopians are the ultimate destroyers is right on.

 

The minute you have rules you need an enforcement mechanism which needs to at the very least appear to be dispassionate, professional, and beholden to interests other than commercial. And the minute you do that you have a state.

 

Well that’s certainly what we’ve been conditioned to believe!

 

Well for the 8000 years of recorded history that's the only think that has been demonstrated to work for any significant length of time. Both Confucius and Machiavelli need to be read for an understanding of governance and human nature, the last two being inextricably linked.

 

I agree it is the present state of human nature that is responsible for the small number of successes of which there are a few.

Some anthropologist believe human cognition developed as an escape mechanism under the pressure of the dictatorial rule we observe in species of common descent. If they are right, in ten million years some anarchistic (or anarchical, or who knows, maybe the term voluntarist will catch on by then) anthropologist will be measuring your skull and jaw bone to see if you are the missing link.

 

All civilizations, all countries, the earth per se, all things that exist within time and space have a beginning and will also come to an end. The USA will come to an end. The Royal Family will come to an end. China will come to an end. Afghanistan will come to an end. France will come to an end. Thailand will come to an end. The moon will come to an end. General Motors will come to an end. Tesla will come to an end. The solar system will come to an end.

The only unknown is the when.

 

I disagree. I think there's a lot of intentional dishonesty--by the politicians and the news media.

 

You must have misread my post - as it states directly that there is a lot of intentional dishonesty by politicians and the MSM.

 

I thought you said a lot of it wasn't dishonesty.

 

In that instance I was talking about the raging masses - the general public. I perhaps did not make this as clear as I could have.

Then I talk about the MSM and politicians being intentionally dishonest.

 

First, why should my police force be beholden to "interests other than commercial"? There is a lot of private security being utilized in the U.S. today that is there because the government police forces are unable or unwilling to protect individual life or property. There are neighborhoods in Detroit that have employed private security because city police are completely absent in those areas.


Second, The minute you have a state you have the worst dregs of humanity (politicians and lobbyists) seeking to use the state for their own ends. If people aren't capable of handling their own affairs without a ruling class forcing them to follow the rules, which of those people is capable of handling other people's affairs?