Message from @MuChaDo

Discord ID: 493390503186923520


2018-09-23 11:52:10 UTC  

Or rely on the other men in your tithing

2018-09-23 11:52:12 UTC  

Anarchy is a state of nature so will be based on a hierarchy

2018-09-23 11:52:27 UTC  

That's an oxymoron

2018-09-23 11:52:49 UTC  

Depends on what you really mean by hierarchy

2018-09-23 11:52:56 UTC  

I hope you arent using it the commie way

2018-09-23 11:53:32 UTC  

A hierarchy of leaders / followers

2018-09-23 11:53:34 UTC  

I only use the correct definition of heirachy, and it's not based off privilege

2018-09-23 11:53:46 UTC  

That's how people organise themselves spontaneously

2018-09-23 11:53:57 UTC  

The scale of the hierarchy depends on the technology available

2018-09-23 11:54:04 UTC  

A heirachy is like a set of stairs, and people are either higher of lower

2018-09-23 11:54:15 UTC  

With modern tech it can encompass a whole country

2018-09-23 11:54:26 UTC  

As long as there is no coercion or involuntary payment to the chief, I dont see whats so wrong

2018-09-23 11:54:32 UTC  

Yes, higher or lower in the 'pecking order'

2018-09-23 11:54:58 UTC  

I.e. aristocracy

2018-09-23 11:54:59 UTC  

There is no guarantee that warlords will take over, but being content with the state we have now IS

2018-09-23 11:55:45 UTC  

How would the cheiftain be payed, would they be appointed it while they work their main job, or would it be an elder.

If it was an elder who is unable to work, what would happen?

2018-09-23 11:55:52 UTC  

"As long as there is no coercion or involuntary payment to the chief" <- magical thinking right here

2018-09-23 11:56:05 UTC  

One sec brb

2018-09-23 11:56:18 UTC  

Chieftain tax for sure

2018-09-23 11:57:07 UTC  

It could be negligible though, equating to the adverage wage

2018-09-23 11:57:42 UTC  

With mediaeval tech it can encompass a whole country

2018-09-23 11:57:58 UTC  

Modern tech can encompass the whole world, which is what seems to be happening

2018-09-23 12:03:47 UTC  

Ok so how is it magical thinking? @MuChaDo

2018-09-23 12:04:37 UTC  

"As long as there is no coercion or involuntary payment to the chief" - if the chief is the one who makes the rules, how is this to be guaranteed?

2018-09-23 12:05:08 UTC  

Anarchism doesnt work, never worked, and will undoubtedly end in death as people accumilate power within the system.

2018-09-23 12:05:40 UTC  

individual localised cases are irrelivant since they operated on tribalism

2018-09-23 12:06:11 UTC  

You are stating the itent for a anarchistic system, which is where there are no heirachies

2018-09-23 12:06:14 UTC  

In a tribe of ten, I dont think the chief will have much of a chance if he starts creating crazy laws for his tribe. Considering the chief is often quite older aswell @MuChaDo

2018-09-23 12:06:34 UTC  

you arent talking about tribalism if you want ANARCHAL capitalism

2018-09-23 12:06:51 UTC  

Tribalism and Anarchy are opposing ideologies

2018-09-23 12:07:01 UTC  

anarchy works until the guy with the gun shows up takes over the power and anyone that refuse get a bullet

2018-09-23 12:07:38 UTC  

Tribal Capitalism is the only example you have mentioned that worked. They do not operate through Anarchy

2018-09-23 12:08:10 UTC  

Yes, I know that hierarchies are inevitable in the private sector, but I see no reason for a select group of people to take the fruits of our labour by force and encapsulate us in their geographic region of operation. Force is active and therefore carries the burden of proof, this is the one thing the state has not fulfilled

2018-09-23 12:08:33 UTC  

@Nordhand Not when there are 100 people with guns also pointing theirs at the agressors head

2018-09-23 12:08:38 UTC  

"In a tribe of ten" - what limits tribes to 10? This is survival of the strongest isn't it?

2018-09-23 12:08:40 UTC  

what you say you want is not Anarchal

2018-09-23 12:08:54 UTC  

Also noted is that you accept the existence of tribes but somehow object to the notion of warlords

2018-09-23 12:09:09 UTC  

it is defined as "Neotribal capitalism"

2018-09-23 12:09:56 UTC  

I have heard this point by lib-socs before, the definition of anarchy has changed from "no hierarchies", to "no state" @Dwarforn

2018-09-23 12:10:03 UTC  

but at the end of the day its semantics