I'll cut it short: could someone give me a hypothetical example of agorism working?
Don't allow leftists to play games with definitions! Some of the libertarian-leaning leftists at this forum will try to redefine "left-wing" back to its original defition (Third Estate, limited government, free-markets, laissez-faire reforms, etc.). Fine! We non-leftists can't stop them from using their own personal definitions; they can use whatever labels they want to describe any concept they want.However, they have the audacity to then use their personal definition of "left-wing" (remember, the original definition, which is no longer valid) to prove that modern leftists are more libertarian than modern rightists! They will say that libertarianism is "inherently leftist" (again, using the original, no longer valid definition), and use that to insist that we should prefer and side with modern leftists over modern rightists.
Question their motives.
Somalia?
I'm trying to understand the process...
I've only a read a bit of the New Libertarian Manifesto, and some articles on the A.L.L. (I recommend that site highly).
As I see it they oppose all involvement in the government, including voting. What they advocate is 'ignoring' the government, that is, peaceful resistance. Stopping payment of all taxes, not receving any services from government and no longer seeking government employment (that includes military service) and income. Also they encourage black market behaviour. Selling all products without government licenses or restrictions. Producers stop applying for government licenses and consumers stop seeking government licenses in products.
Eventually as government loses its influence it would just fade away.
Hey, this is a private residence man...
Wouldn't that result in the government cracking down instead?
As I see it, the whole point would be to encourage less and less employment in the arms of government that crack down. To encourage people to not work for the police, to not enlist in the army, to not enlist in the military police etc. Once the governments enforcement is taken away whats left? A bunch of bureaucrats.
Thats how I picture it at least. Any agorist is free to help me out. Im curious to.
The problem I see is that as long as there is a non-agorist majority, it still wouldn't matter because there would plenty of people/money for the state to use. Even if many people in your area became agorist, if there were enough people in another state that weren't, the federal government could use their money to come after you.
It seems that if there were enough agorists for agorism to work, then voting would work too...
Ego: The problem I see is that as long as there is a non-agorist majority, it still wouldn't matter because there would plenty of people/money for the state to use. Even many people in your area became agorist, if there were enough people in another state that weren't, the federal government could use their money to come after you. It seems that if there were enough agorists for agorism to work, then voting would work too...
The problem I see is that as long as there is a non-agorist majority, it still wouldn't matter because there would plenty of people/money for the state to use. Even many people in your area became agorist, if there were enough people in another state that weren't, the federal government could use their money to come after you.
Well thats why agorists preach education and getting the message out to as many people as possible, that includes at a federal level. What is the government going to do when most of its armed forces and police have been, through debate and arguement, convinced that they should no longer serve the state. As I see it, once the military is out, theres no need to convince anyone else, although it still should be done. I mean... is the IRS still going to try to enforce taxes when there is no one to enforce. They know theyre thought of as the scum of the earth.
But agorists are opposed to voting per se, as it is part of the political structure they are trying to bring down. If the majority of people were agorists I think voting would be equivalent to an athlete in top physical condition starting to use drugs, not training, and starting to eat junk food.
When governments start to run out of enlistees, wouldn't they either raise salaries or start a draft? I just can't see a case where agorism would work and elections wouldn't.
Who would enforce the draft? They're short on enlistees, that's why they're having a draft in the first place.
I imagine agorists would hope the government would be unable to do what you recomended because a) tax revenues would be falling since tax resistance is encouraged and b) use of government money is discouraged while use of private commodity money is at the same time encouraged thus loosening governments grip on money and making its ability to raise salaries for any state jobs obsolete.
Ego: I'll cut it short: could someone give me a hypothetical example of agorism working?
Sure.
Give me an example where you traded X for Y with B without any government involvement.
The Origins of Capitalism
And for more periodic bloggings by moi,
Leftlibertarian.org
Ego: Wouldn't that result in the government cracking down instead?
I suggest reading the New Libertarian Manifesto by Samuel Edward Konkin III.
In it he goes through the phases of Agorism establishing that the possibility of government "crackdowns" or Pogroms would not be likely until the second phase of the Agorist revolution, at which point Agorists exist to such a level that small pockets of Agorists exist to help ensure mutual protection from the state. This is where the seeds for the Revolutionary Agorist Cadre begin to take place.
I did a video on protection methods for Agorists here.
Ego: The problem I see is that as long as there is a non-agorist majority, it still wouldn't matter because there would plenty of people/money for the state to use. Even many people in your area became agorist, if there were enough people in another state that weren't, the federal government could use their money to come after you.
The problem I see is that as long as there is a non-agorist majority, it still wouldn't matter because there would plenty of people/money for the state to use.
Even many people in your area became agorist, if there were enough people in another state that weren't, the federal government could use their money to come after you.
Revolutions have never required majorities. Less than 1/3 of the Americans really supported the secession from Britain. All that is required is enough Agorists and enough connections in the black market so that the Revolutionary Agorist Cadre can function and protection agencies can begin to rely on eachother for information to prosecute criminals holding government positions.
Phase 3: High-Density, Large Condensation Agorist Society In this phase, the State moves into a series of terminal crises, somewhat analogous to the well-known Marxist scenario, but with different causes - in this case, real ones. Fortunately, the potential for damage has been drastically reduced by the sapping of the State's resources and the corrosion of its authority by the growth of the Counter-Economy. In fact, as the resources of the economy approach equality between the State and Agora, the State is pushed intro crisis. Wars and rampant inflation with depressions and crack-ups become perpetual as the State attempts to redeem its authority. It may be possible to reverse its declilne by corrupting the agora with seductive anti-principles*, so the NLA's first task is clear: to maintain vigilance and purity of thought. In this phase, the NLA (New Libertarian Alliance/Revolutionary Agorist Cadre/etc.) may no longer hold either label or much of its old form. The most motivated New Libertarians will move into the research and development of segments of the budding agorist protection and arbitration agencies and into positions as directors of the protection company syndicates. The situation now approaches revolution but is still reversible. Again the New Libertarians are in the forefront of maintaining and defending gains to this point, but are looking ahead to the next phase. The NLA (now just a collective term for the most forward-looking elements) can accelerate the process by discovering and developing the optimal methods of protection and defense, both by word and deed, for their industry and by entrepreneuring its innovations. At this phase transition between three and four we have the last unleashing of violence by the Ruling Class of the State to suppress those elements that would bring them to justice for all past state crimes. The State's intellectuals perceive that its authority has failed and all will be lost; things must be reversed now or never. The NLA must prevent premature awareness of this status or premature action on this awareness. This is the final strategic goal of the NLA. When the State unleases its final wave of suprression - and is successfully resisted - this is the definition of Revolution. Once realization has occured that the State no longer can plunder and pay off its parasitical class, the enforcers will switch sides to those better able to pay them and the State will rapidly implode into a series of pockets of statism in backward areas - if any. New Libertarian Manifesto, IV: Revolution, Our Strategy 65-66
In this phase, the State moves into a series of terminal crises, somewhat analogous to the well-known Marxist scenario, but with different causes - in this case, real ones. Fortunately, the potential for damage has been drastically reduced by the sapping of the State's resources and the corrosion of its authority by the growth of the Counter-Economy.
In fact, as the resources of the economy approach equality between the State and Agora, the State is pushed intro crisis. Wars and rampant inflation with depressions and crack-ups become perpetual as the State attempts to redeem its authority. It may be possible to reverse its declilne by corrupting the agora with seductive anti-principles*, so the NLA's first task is clear: to maintain vigilance and purity of thought. In this phase, the NLA (New Libertarian Alliance/Revolutionary Agorist Cadre/etc.) may no longer hold either label or much of its old form. The most motivated New Libertarians will move into the research and development of segments of the budding agorist protection and arbitration agencies and into positions as directors of the protection company syndicates.
The situation now approaches revolution but is still reversible. Again the New Libertarians are in the forefront of maintaining and defending gains to this point, but are looking ahead to the next phase. The NLA (now just a collective term for the most forward-looking elements) can accelerate the process by discovering and developing the optimal methods of protection and defense, both by word and deed, for their industry and by entrepreneuring its innovations.
At this phase transition between three and four we have the last unleashing of violence by the Ruling Class of the State to suppress those elements that would bring them to justice for all past state crimes. The State's intellectuals perceive that its authority has failed and all will be lost; things must be reversed now or never. The NLA must prevent premature awareness of this status or premature action on this awareness. This is the final strategic goal of the NLA.
When the State unleases its final wave of suprression - and is successfully resisted - this is the definition of Revolution. Once realization has occured that the State no longer can plunder and pay off its parasitical class, the enforcers will switch sides to those better able to pay them and the State will rapidly implode into a series of pockets of statism in backward areas - if any.
New Libertarian Manifesto, IV: Revolution, Our Strategy
65-66
*Like your parlour-revolutionary ideals.
No, because voting is on the level of the statists and as Agorists are the anti-statists, the statists would have no choice but to band together and battle the Agorists - a battle the Agorists would obviously lose as it is out of their element.
Agorism is better than voting for several reasons.One, the idea is new and revolutionary, not old and reformist. Votes do not rally people so much and there is less incentive involved. In the Agora, one profits while fighting the state. With the state, one just signs away their mortgage to a failed Ron Paul campaign. Two, the purpose of Agorism is to utilize the market advantage against the socialist weakness - calculating capital in an efficient way.
Three, reformists, like you, are corruptible by anti-principles - such as giving into compromise. Agorists, on the other hand, should not be, as it is inherently uncompromising and purist.
Ego: When governments start to run out of enlistees, wouldn't they either raise salaries or start a draft? I just can't see a case where agorism would work and elections wouldn't.
If the government were to bring back the draft then the Agorist population would explode in numbers.
If the government raised salaries - they won't to the extent that people would start to find military life profitable - then they'd essentially lose out on all those precious resources you speak of for paying a group that cannot fight in the way that the Agorists are fighting.