Anarchy

[BadBeast]

care to elaborate?

Sure.  Most of the consequences of "your" or "my" actions are actually based on a vast array of outside factors and influences.  To paraphrase RAW, most people take credit for things that are only partially their doing, and this gives them jumbo-size egos, and most people take the blame for things that are only partially their fault, and this gives them jumbo-size guilt complexes.

Recently, I was on a jury...Not going to go into all the details here, but part of what was discussed were the horrible injuries of a woman who pulled out in front of a drunk driver.  She was sober, but was leaving a going-away party at 2AM, in a light rain shower, having been up since 5AM the previous morning.  The drunk was travelling at an enormous speed, blissfully unaware of the cop trying to catch up to him (the cop was driving the other way originally).  The best models that could be generated showed that the lady would have been okay if the drunk had been going the speed limit (it's hard to judge speed in the desert at night), or even 10MPH over.

Was she at fault for pulling out based on bad data (that being the bad data her exhausted eyes were feeding to her brain concerning the speed of the other vehicle?

Was the drunk at fault for going 97MPH in a 55MPH zone?

Were they both at fault?

Were they both at fault, alongside multiple environmental factors (darkness, rain, lack of points of reference)?

Consequences again. None of them are 100% responsible for this horrible situation. But the drunk driver will have ended up taking the whole rap for it.
(That's part of the reason the Pigs over here are very reluctant to pursue a driver determined not to stop)

[Doktor Howl]

sorry, I posted before I saw your post

S'ok.

But the fact is, nobody is 100% responsible for anything, so the core concept of rational anarchism is basically crap.

We could, however, keep the "rational" part, as least as much as we are able.  For those who insist on the anarchy bit, there's Somalia.

Dok,
Will take pathetic government over bad government.

[Doktor Howl]

care to elaborate?

Sure.  Most of the consequences of "your" or "my" actions are actually based on a vast array of outside factors and influences.  To paraphrase RAW, most people take credit for things that are only partially their doing, and this gives them jumbo-size egos, and most people take the blame for things that are only partially their fault, and this gives them jumbo-size guilt complexes.

Recently, I was on a jury...Not going to go into all the details here, but part of what was discussed were the horrible injuries of a woman who pulled out in front of a drunk driver.  She was sober, but was leaving a going-away party at 2AM, in a light rain shower, having been up since 5AM the previous morning.  The drunk was travelling at an enormous speed, blissfully unaware of the cop trying to catch up to him (the cop was driving the other way originally).  The best models that could be generated showed that the lady would have been okay if the drunk had been going the speed limit (it's hard to judge speed in the desert at night), or even 10MPH over.

Was she at fault for pulling out based on bad data (that being the bad data her exhausted eyes were feeding to her brain concerning the speed of the other vehicle?

Was the drunk at fault for going 97MPH in a 55MPH zone?

Were they both at fault?

Were they both at fault, alongside multiple environmental factors (darkness, rain, lack of points of reference)?

Consequences again. None of them are 100% responsible for this horrible situation. But the drunk driver will have ended up taking the whole rap for it.
(That's part of the reason the Pigs over here are very reluctant to pursue a driver determined not to stop)

Well, he took the consequences, combined with the consequences of not bothering with a seatbelt.  He was ejected from the vehicle, which then rolled over him, leaving a Shroud of Chevy imprint on the  passenger-side door.

At no point did he know he was being followed.  He was just doing 97MPH for kicks, apparently.  It's a Tucson thing.

[Requia ☣]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?   

[Cramulus]

I'm with you about responsibility.
Without splitting hairs on what percent responsible we are for anything --

                       -- which opens up that mucky discussion about causality and free will

I do like the premise - that none of us should ever hide behind "I was just following orders." We are relatively autonomous individuals. We shouldn't choose our actions based purely on whether something is lawful or not, rather we should weigh each action on its individual merits.

[Doktor Howl]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?  

Government is something humans do.

Any anarchist system would instantly devolve into a cult of personality despotism.

[Requia ☣]

Any anarchist system would instantly devolve into a cult of personality despotism.

Only if you're lucky.  That would be the 'necessary' part.

[Doktor Howl]

I'm with you about responsibility.
Without splitting hairs on what percent responsible we are for anything --

                       -- which opens up that mucky discussion about causality and free will

I do like the premise - that none of us should ever hide behind "I was just following orders." We are relatively autonomous individuals. We shouldn't choose our actions based purely on whether something is lawful or not, rather we should weigh each action on its individual merits.

Just because the consequences are driven by multiple factors doesn't absolve anyone of the factors they introduced.

And a bad law is no law, at least no law that you should obey.  The problem is, people conflate "bad laws" (segregation, for example), with "laws they don't like" (copyright law, etc).

[BadBeast]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?  

Government is something humans do.

Any anarchist system would instantly devolve into a cult of personality despotism.

Anarchy IS Personality despotism! YOUR Personality, rulin' it large, over YOUR own shit!

[Doktor Howl]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?  

Government is something humans do.

Any anarchist system would instantly devolve into a cult of personality despotism.

Anarchy IS Personality despotism! YOUR Personality, rulin' it large, over YOUR own shit!

Yeah, a few of my mates and I discussed this, and have decided to form a partnership.

Gimme your sammich.

[Cramulus]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?   

my GF is friends with these anarchist sect from montreal. I was niggling with them about anarchy, pointing out how despite being so against capitalism, they still have jobs and bank accounts. (well, most of them) Despite being so against police authority, they still call the police after getting robbed.

They pointed out that not all anarchists base their philosophy on some kind of idealized noble-savage narrative, or a vision of utopia. A lot of them recognize that a government and rule of law is necessary to prevent assholes from taking our resources and fucking our dead bodies. But because humans are bad at governance, we individuals need to hold the rule of law at arm's length, follow it when it's good and resist it when it's bad.

I had pointed out that pure anarchism would almost immediately devolve into a bunch of tough guys with no shirts. So much authority is derived from force, and in pure anarchy there is no way to regulate that this force is applied fairly. It turns out, many anarchists agree, and would feel that this is a mis-characterization of their position.  Certainly nothing about Ratatosk's description of Rational Anarchism strikes me as a desire to abolish all government. It seems more like an attitude to help deal with the absurd and often contradictory signals that lawful society blasts us with.

And a bad law is no law, at least no law that you should obey.  The problem is, people conflate "bad laws" (segregation, for example), with "laws they don't like" (copyright law, etc).

totally. It sounds like you're in agreement with Rat too. Not all laws are bad. We need to think for ourselves and decide which laws to follow on an individual basis.

[BadBeast]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?  

Government is one of the consequences of people NOT wanting the responsibility of running their own lives responsibly.

[Doktor Howl]

totally. It sounds like you're in agreement with Rat too. Not all laws are bad. We need to think for ourselves and decide which laws to follow on an individual basis.

Just so long as we all understand that district attorneys are notoriously lacking in philosophical understanding, and that judges aren't too keen on it, either...And that a little bit of disregard for rotten laws can translate into a great deal of time having no fun at all.

Not saying that bad laws should be obeyed, I'm just saying that The Machine™ will keep playing long after it stops being fun for the individual in question.

[Doktor Howl]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?  

Government is one of the consequences of people NOT wanting the responsibility of running their own lives responsibly.

Horseshit.  Government is one of the consequences of people NOT wanting someone to kill them and take their sammich.

[BadBeast]

I thought the core concept of rational anarchy was that government is a necessary evil?  

Government is something humans do.

Any anarchist system would instantly devolve into a cult of personality despotism.

Anarchy IS Personality despotism! YOUR Personality, rulin' it large, over YOUR own shit!

Yeah, a few of my mates and I discussed this, and have decided to form a partnership.

Gimme your sammich.

Come and get it, if you think you're up  to it.

How much is a bit of my sarny worth, when divided between you and your mates?  Is it worth trying to stomp me for?  Just how badly do you want it? And how did I get in the priviliged position of having such a  covetous sammich?
Is it because I have resources you are not aware of?
Is it because I don't consider you and your mates a threat?
Do I look like a halfwit?
If not, then it's best to think twice before you try and take it. But if you want a bite, . . . . *Hands Dok the sammich*