"There has never been true communism."

[henry quirk]

regular evictions and ejections

executions, mebbe


Well you might get the deus ex machina magical ending to the story it's true. Or you might get open revolt, sullen compliance, and/or people just leaving the territory because it doesn't seem to be working out how they hoped.

yep...this is true of any experiment...'murica, right now, is a good example...folks movin within (or just leavin' completely), a whole whack of sullen compliance, the beginnings of open revolt...all that's missin' is the magic


Barter economies are small, the range and scale of trade is minimal, supply chains for manufacturing complex product simply cannot be maintained, saving and investing are constrained,

why?


How does extradition work here by the way?

bounty hunters: why not?


Foreign states can't really sign treaties for that sort of thing when the counterparty to the treaty is signing on behalf of a non-sovereign club.

why can't that great entrepreneur FDP enter into contract with other nations? he's a sovereign

why can't the magician, HQ, enter into contract with other nations? he's a sovereign too


so your borders are quite likely to be closed

nah...the french are lookin' for a guy...cross that border, babee, cross it and make with the hunt...respect the three, though, frenchie or you may be the one hunted


if you are also associated with high levels of smuggling, which is kinda why half the people are going to even be there.

smugglin': ain't no such animal in the natural rights libertarian minarchy...many sketchy folks will make their way there...abide the three

[henry quirk]

There have been bossy people throughout history...

Right. And what's the very first thing they always do?

Centralize power. They take charge of everything, through government fiat.

And what do Communists do? Centralize power in big government. So it's the least surprising thing of all when one of these "bossy" types takes over the engine provided to him by the revolution, and uses it to destroy the people. They've prepared their own execution.

It's always that way. And you can't point to a single case where that's not how Communism has played out.

she makes me tired, Mannie

[FlashDangerpants]

regular evictions and ejections

executions, mebbe

What exactly would merit execution under that three thing rulebook of yours? Would skipping town to avoid debt or to not pay for the upkeep of your kid get you in deadly trouble?

Well you might get the deus ex machina magical ending to the story it's true. Or you might get open revolt, sullen compliance, and/or people just leaving the territory because it doesn't seem to be working out how they hoped.

yep...this is true of any experiment...'murica, right now, is a good example...folks movin within (or just leavin' completely), a whole whack of sullen compliance, the beginnings of open revolt...all that's missin' is the magic

Now imagine that, but less to America, which is something your not-a-state would not resemble, and more to a third world nation, probably Somalia, they have very little government, lots of independent little societies there, plenty of smugglers and other swashbuckly types.

Barter economies are small, the range and scale of trade is minimal, supply chains for manufacturing complex product simply cannot be maintained, saving and investing are constrained,

why?

Credit supply mostly. Imagine trying to sell a futures contract on the product of next year's turkey shoot, backed by a 50% stake in grandma's furniture when she dies.

How does extradition work here by the way?

bounty hunters: why not?

So the Chinese turn up on your border demanding that some part time watchguard allows them in to hunt down some guy for the crime of writing bad stuff about them on the interwibblies. Next to them is an French agent with an arrest warrant for one of your citizens(what do we call citizens here? residents perhaps) suspected of hosting child porno web sites on your presumably unpoliced servers. Next in line is an American who refuses to tell you what he is doing there, but he's in a humvee and it has a very big gun indeed and he expects your guy to get out of the way now unless he wants new holes in his head and chest.

Who even decides what happens next with any of them?

Foreign states can't really sign treaties for that sort of thing when the counterparty to the treaty is signing on behalf of a non-sovereign club.

why can't that great entrepreneur FDP enter into contract with other nations? he's a sovereign

why can't the magician, HQ, enter into contract with other nations? he's a sovereign too

FDP is a thief and is running from a jurisdictional issue, he doesn't want there to be any form of extradition.

As soon as Henry the magician can demonstrate that he is in a position to extradite FDP with legal authority, and that he has no need for us to extradite anyone back in the other direction because that's not happening unless he can sign multiple international treaties to do with human rights and fair trials, he can indeed begin negotiations on behalf of something-that-isn't-a-club once confirmed as their ambassador.

so your borders are quite likely to be closed

nah...the french are lookin' for a guy...cross that border, babee, cross it and make with the hunt...respect the three, though, frenchie or you may be the one hunted

Ooooh, sorry. We're very unlikely to consider your hokey legal system appropriate for trying one of our citizens, especially if there is the possibility of death sentence at the end of it. We usually require the USA, which is signatory to multiple international treaties and has strong fair trial protection to take the death penalty off the board before we will extradite there. Your little club would be a problem. But we'd probably just hire a local to kidnap anyone we wanted to take away rather than actually go there.

if you are also associated with high levels of smuggling, which is kinda why half the people are going to even be there.

smugglin': ain't no such animal in the natural rights libertarian minarchy...many sketchy folks will make their way there...abide the three

Yeah, but your neighbouring states are liable to take a very different view of that sort of thing, especially as the easy way to get rich there would presumably be cross border duty evasion on products such as whisky and cigarettes. You aren't going to have a say in whether your borders are closed. Of course, then you have to find the person resonsible for other people losing their incomes due to the border being shut, and I suppose murder them with your death courts.

[henry quirk]

What exactly would merit execution under that three thing rulebook of yours? Would skipping town to avoid debt or to not pay for the upkeep of your kid get you in deadly trouble?

skippin' out on a debt might save you, but mebbe you don't wanna come back, yeah? might wanna stay sharp too cuz somebody might have been hired to retrieve you...refusal to pay debt probably ends the same way it does now: in more civilized areas his shit taken...in less civilized areas he pays with pain and blood


Now imagine that, but less to America, which is something your not-a-state would not resemble, and more to a third world nation, probably Somalia, they have very little government, lots of independent little societies there, plenty of smugglers and other swashbuckly types.

if it plays out that way, it plays out that way


Credit supply mostly. Imagine trying to sell a futures contract on the product of next year's turkey shoot, backed by a 50% stake in grandma's furniture when she dies.

futures sounds awfully dicey: why indulge in speculation? just buy the damn wheat that actually exists instead of buyin' the possibility that may not come to be?


So the Chinese turn up on your border demanding that some part time watchguard allows them in to hunt down some guy for the crime of writing bad stuff about them on the interwibblies.

denied, unless what he wrote was libel


Next to them is an French agent with an arrest warrant for one of your citizens(what do we call citizens here? residents perhaps) suspected of hosting child porno web sites on your presumably unpoliced servers.

child porn is disgustin' but makin' it is immoral...if (let's call him) mark is merely collecting images, then the french can go home, but if mark is makin' it or financin' it the french can have him (unless, of course, he was makin' it in the minarchy...then the french can have his corpse, if they want it)

as for the servers: they'll be as policed or unpoliced as their owners like


Next in line is an American who refuses to tell you what he is doing there, but he's in a humvee and it has a very big gun indeed and he expects your guy to get out of the way now unless he wants new holes in his head and chest.

he might be shot where he stands...multiple times...from multiple angles...threatenin' an innocent to get to the guilty: a bad idea

incidentally: the minarchy I crave will be 'murica...if a natural rights minarchy is liable to happen, it'll be here, a big place, lots of room physically and abstractly with deep, if uneven, roots sunk into life, liberty, and property...instead of 50 experiments, thousands of attempts, always fluxin' and flowin'

of course, the mistake all three of your guys make is makin' a stink at the border...shut your mouth, smile, drive on in, conduct your business, if you can...mind the three


Who even decides what happens next with any of them?

well, I just told you how I think it should play out...truth be told: any could play out in a number of ways, dependin' how rabid the minarchists on hand are (on a scale of 1 to 10, ten bein' the rabid minarchist who sees the three as damned near scriptual, one bein' the pussy who wants all the comforts and protections of a liberal democracy, but wants it as a minarchy ) it'll play out accordingly


FDP is a thief and is running from a jurisdictional issue, he doesn't want there to be any form of extradition.

well, when the folks he robbed come lookin', if they do, he'll get no protection (unless he pays for it)...unless, of course, he's been bad within the minarchy...the folks from elsewhere can have him after...as for extradition: as you describe it, it ain't possible in a natural tights libertarian minarchy

and: HQ has no interest in extradition...bein' rabid, he'll pursue, himself or by proxy...if pursuit isn't possible, wounds are licked, lessons are learned, and am eye is kept open for the sumbitch who stole his water


Ooooh, sorry. We're very unlikely to consider your hokey legal system appropriate for trying one of our citizens

ooooh, sorry, we aren't interested in tryin' your guy (unless we got him for doin' wrong in the minarchy..you can have him after): you want him, come get him and do so within the context of the three


But we'd probably just hire a local to kidnap anyone we wanted to take away rather than actually go there.

if truly a local, he understands the three...bounty hunt to your heart's content, local


Yeah, but your neighbouring states are liable to take a very different view of that sort of thing, especially as the easy way to get rich there would presumably be cross border duty evasion on products such as whisky and cigarettes. You aren't going to have a say in whether your borders are closed. Of course, then you have to find the person resonsible for other people losing their incomes due to the border being shut, and I suppose murder them with your death courts.

border is always open...come...enjoy...conduct your business...hunt that bounty, boy...come get him..shoulda stopped him on your side in the first place...remember the three

[Immanuel Can]

Here's a good thing on the subject of "true Communism."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-151p6u9XQ

[FlashDangerpants]

What exactly would merit execution under that three thing rulebook of yours? Would skipping town to avoid debt or to not pay for the upkeep of your kid get you in deadly trouble?

skippin' out on a debt might save you, but mebbe you don't wanna come back, yeah? might wanna stay sharp too cuz somebody might have been hired to retrieve you...refusal to pay debt probably ends the same way it does now: in more civilized areas his shit taken...in less civilized areas he pays with pain and blood

So, nobody take any risk, the result can be torture. But debt and risk are very fundamental to modern capitalism at all levels, when there's imbalances we have major recessions.

Now imagine that, but less to America, which is something your not-a-state would not resemble, and more to a third world nation, probably Somalia, they have very little government, lots of independent little societies there, plenty of smugglers and other swashbuckly types.

if it plays out that way, it plays out that way

Okay, I guess that doesn't put everybody off. It's hard to see that this sort of situation is really that desirable to most though.

Credit supply mostly. Imagine trying to sell a futures contract on the product of next year's turkey shoot, backed by a 50% stake in grandma's furniture when she dies.

futures sounds awfully dicey: why indulge in speculation? just buy the damn wheat that actually exists instead of buyin' the possibility that may not come to be?

Well the point for producers is to ensure that a glut in the price of whatever they make doesn't ruin them when the spot price is depressed, for large scale buyers of the same commodity, it helps them to plan months and years ahead so they can invest without the risk of losing that investment if the market goes on the wrong direction. For hedge funds the point is usually to ... well, hedge against some other position not working out (if you lend money to a plastics firm, it might go bad if the oil price goes up and thus their primary input cost, so you might buy some oil futures so that the lost money somes back). And so on, it allows complex multi-party financial transactions over a long period of time which makes the whole supply and demand thing we all rely on work more fluidly. Joe Average might see no personal value, but his job is probably made possible by this sort of thing in the background, and his ability to spend his income on stuff he likes almost certainly is.

So the Chinese turn up on your border demanding that some part time watchguard allows them in to hunt down some guy for the crime of writing bad stuff about them on the interwibblies.

denied, unless what he wrote was libel

But he can just hire a bounty hunter and spirit the dude away.

Next to them is an French agent with an arrest warrant for one of your citizens(what do we call citizens here? residents perhaps) suspected of hosting child porno web sites on your presumably unpoliced servers.

child porn is disgustin' but makin' it is immoral...if (let's call him) mark is merely collecting images, then the french can go home, but if mark is makin' it or financin' it the french can have him (unless, of course, he was makin' it in the minarchy...then the french can have his corpse, if they want it)

as for the servers: they'll be as policed or unpoliced as their owners like

Probably half of the people in your club-slash-nation won't accept that answer and now want to lynch him. Should they be put to the sword?

Next in line is an American who refuses to tell you what he is doing there, but he's in a humvee and it has a very big gun indeed and he expects your guy to get out of the way now unless he wants new holes in his head and chest.

he might be shot where he stands...multiple times...from multiple angles...threatenin' an innocent to get to the guilty: a bad idea

incidentally: the minarchy I crave will be 'murica...if a natural rights minarchy is liable to happen, it'll be here, a big place, lots of room physically and abstractly with deep, if uneven, roots sunk into life, liberty, and property...instead of 50 experiments, thousands of attempts, always fluxin' and flowin'

of course, the mistake all three of your guys make is makin' a stink at the border...shut your mouth, smile, drive on in, conduct your business, if you can...mind the three


Who even decides what happens next with any of them?

well, I just told you how I think it should play out...truth be told: any could play out in a number of ways, dependin' how rabid the minarchists on hand are (on a scale of 1 to 10, ten bein' the rabid minarchist who sees the three as damned near scriptual, one bein' the pussy who wants all the comforts and protections of a liberal democracy, but wants it as a minarchy ) it'll play out accordingly

Probably best if you choose a site for your playground that's far from America, because your friends in Iraq will confirm this is the sort of thing that tends to rile the US armed forces, and they don't have a reputation for offering explanations when they are kicking foreign doors in.

The people responding to these incursions are in some cases endangering innocent members of your own club should there be escalation of hostilities. Does this render them liable for execution?

FDP is a thief and is running from a jurisdictional issue, he doesn't want there to be any form of extradition.

well, when the folks he robbed come lookin', if they do, he'll get no protection (unless he pays for it)...unless, of course, he's been bad within the minarchy...the folks from elsewhere can have him after...as for extradition: as you describe it, it ain't possible in a natural tights libertarian minarchy

and: HQ has no interest in extradition...bein' rabid, he'll pursue, himself or by proxy...if pursuit isn't possible, wounds are licked, lessons are learned, and am eye is kept open for the sumbitch who stole his water

This is all fine and stuff from your perspective. But the simple truth is the rest of the world is not going to deal on your terms. Not when you are sat on their borders dealing in banned firearms and substances, subverting their tax incomes, and harbouring their fugitives. Legally you realise we can't actually prosecute people we kidnapped from foreign jurisdictions without due process that is only available through extradition. You would get leashed, it would just be collectively rather than individually. By the time your population abandoned the project they would be exiting as refugees.

Ooooh, sorry. We're very unlikely to consider your hokey legal system appropriate for trying one of our citizens

ooooh, sorry, we aren't interested in tryin' your guy (unless we got him for doin' wrong in the minarchy..you can have him after): you want him, come get him and do so within the context of the three


But we'd probably just hire a local to kidnap anyone we wanted to take away rather than actually go there.

if truly a local, he understands the three...bounty hunt to your heart's content, local

Seems to me you can't kidnap a person who belongs to himself on nehalf of a foreign power without breaking at least one of those three of necessity. Plus, well, the leashing is not even metaphorical in this case.

Yeah, but your neighbouring states are liable to take a very different view of that sort of thing, especially as the easy way to get rich there would presumably be cross border duty evasion on products such as whisky and cigarettes. You aren't going to have a say in whether your borders are closed. Of course, then you have to find the person resonsible for other people losing their incomes due to the border being shut, and I suppose murder them with your death courts.

border is always open...come...enjoy...conduct your business...hunt that bounty, boy...come get him..shoulda stopped him on your side in the first place...remember the three

Can you see how I described your situation as the wild west earlier on?

[henry quirk]

So, nobody take any risk, the result can be torture. But debt and risk are very fundamental to modern capitalism at all levels, when there's imbalances we have major recessions.

pay your debts: have no problem


Okay, I guess that doesn't put everybody off. It's hard to see that this sort of situation is really that desirable to most though.

only folks who want be there (here) will be...got no idea how many that is


Well the point for producers is to ensure that a glut in the price of whatever they make doesn't ruin them when the spot price is depressed, for large scale buyers of the same commodity, it helps them to plan months and years ahead so they can invest without the risk of losing that investment if the market goes on the wrong direction.

paraphase: risk (is) very fundamental to modern capitalism and its hairy, wild brother, free enterprise


all this...

For hedge funds the point is usually to ... well, hedge against some other position not working out (if you lend money to a plastics firm, it might go bad if the oil price goes up and thus their primary input cost, so you might buy some oil futures so that the lost money somes back). And so on, it allows complex multi-party financial transactions over a long period of time which makes the whole supply and demand thing we all rely on work more fluidly. Joe Average might see no personal value, but his job is probably made possible by this sort of thing in the background, and his ability to spend his income on stuff he likes almost certainly is.

...sounds like magical thinkin': let's sell stuff that doesn't exist with stuff that has no backin' value ('cept faith)

fine set of duds you got there, emperor


But he can just hire a bounty hunter and spirit the dude away.

yep, so why announce it?


Probably half of the people in your club-slash-nation won't accept that answer and now want to lynch him. Should they be put to the sword?

probably, but let's face it: he was a scum bag...I won't cry for him, or look to see the mob to get theirs


Probably best if you choose a site for your playground that's far from America, because your friends in Iraq will confirm this is the sort of thing that tends to rile the US armed forces, and they don't have a reputation for offering explanations when they are kicking foreign doors in.

soldiers are welcome


The people responding to these incursions are in some cases endangering innocent members of your own club should there be escalation of hostilities. Does this render them liable for execution?

which people and which incursions? I lost track along the way


This is all fine and stuff from your perspective. But the simple truth is the rest of the world is not going to deal on your terms.

so what? there's always someone sanctioning someone or embargoing someone

it is what it it


Legally you realise we can't actually prosecute people we kidnapped from foreign jurisdictions without due process that is only available through extradition.

that france, for example, has hobbled itself in such a way is the 'murican minarchy's problem how?

he's here...come get him...we won't stop you (unless we got him for sumthin' first)


By the time your population abandoned the project they would be exiting as refugees.

que sera, sera


Seems to me you can't kidnap a person who belongs to himself on nehalf of a foreign power without breaking at least one of those three of necessity. Plus, well, the leashing is not even metaphorical in this case.

seems to me...

if the hunter is a local: he'll know better than to go after a bounty without evidence of life, liberty, or property havin' been deprived..if he does, and others find out, he may end up hunted

...and...

if the hunter is from elsewhere: he better know better than to go after a bounty without evidence of life, liberty, or property havin' been deprived..if he does, and others find out, he may end up hunted

so: be vewy vewy qwiet huntin' wabbit


Can you see how I described your situation as the wild west earlier on?

sure...did I disagree with that assessment?

[Belinda]

So, nobody take any risk, the result can be torture. But debt and risk are very fundamental to modern capitalism at all levels, when there's imbalances we have major recessions.

pay your debts: have no problem


Okay, I guess that doesn't put everybody off. It's hard to see that this sort of situation is really that desirable to most though.

only folks who want be there (here) will be...got no idea how many that is


Well the point for producers is to ensure that a glut in the price of whatever they make doesn't ruin them when the spot price is depressed, for large scale buyers of the same commodity, it helps them to plan months and years ahead so they can invest without the risk of losing that investment if the market goes on the wrong direction.

paraphase: risk (is) very fundamental to modern capitalism and its hairy, wild brother, free enterprise


all this...

For hedge funds the point is usually to ... well, hedge against some other position not working out (if you lend money to a plastics firm, it might go bad if the oil price goes up and thus their primary input cost, so you might buy some oil futures so that the lost money somes back). And so on, it allows complex multi-party financial transactions over a long period of time which makes the whole supply and demand thing we all rely on work more fluidly. Joe Average might see no personal value, but his job is probably made possible by this sort of thing in the background, and his ability to spend his income on stuff he likes almost certainly is.

...sounds like magical thinkin': let's sell stuff that doesn't exist with stuff that has no backin' value ('cept faith)

fine set of duds you got there, emperor


But he can just hire a bounty hunter and spirit the dude away.

yep, so why announce it?


Probably half of the people in your club-slash-nation won't accept that answer and now want to lynch him. Should they be put to the sword?

probably, but let's face it: he was a scum bag...I won't cry for him, or look to see the mob to get theirs


Probably best if you choose a site for your playground that's far from America, because your friends in Iraq will confirm this is the sort of thing that tends to rile the US armed forces, and they don't have a reputation for offering explanations when they are kicking foreign doors in.

soldiers are welcome


The people responding to these incursions are in some cases endangering innocent members of your own club should there be escalation of hostilities. Does this render them liable for execution?

which people and which incursions? I lost track along the way


This is all fine and stuff from your perspective. But the simple truth is the rest of the world is not going to deal on your terms.

so what? there's always someone sanctioning someone or embargoing someone

it is what it it


Legally you realise we can't actually prosecute people we kidnapped from foreign jurisdictions without due process that is only available through extradition.

that france, for example, has hobbled itself in such a way is the 'murican minarchy's problem how?

he's here...come get him...we won't stop you (unless we got him for sumthin' first)


By the time your population abandoned the project they would be exiting as refugees.

que sera, sera


Seems to me you can't kidnap a person who belongs to himself on nehalf of a foreign power without breaking at least one of those three of necessity. Plus, well, the leashing is not even metaphorical in this case.

seems to me...

if the hunter is a local: he'll know better than to go after a bounty without evidence of life, liberty, or property havin' been deprived..if he does, and others find out, he may end up hunted

...and...

if the hunter is from elsewhere: he better know better than to go after a bounty without evidence of life, liberty, or property havin' been deprived..if he does, and others find out, he may end up hunted

so: be vewy vewy qwiet huntin' wabbit


Can you see how I described your situation as the wild west earlier on?

sure...did I disagree with that assessment?

There are differences between free enterprise and theft. These are not natural differences. Dogs eat dogs. Those differences are artificially enshrined in civilised laws and constitutions.

[FlashDangerpants]

So, nobody take any risk, the result can be torture. But debt and risk are very fundamental to modern capitalism at all levels, when there's imbalances we have major recessions.

pay your debts: have no problem


Okay, I guess that doesn't put everybody off. It's hard to see that this sort of situation is really that desirable to most though.

only folks who want be there (here) will be...got no idea how many that is


Well the point for producers is to ensure that a glut in the price of whatever they make doesn't ruin them when the spot price is depressed, for large scale buyers of the same commodity, it helps them to plan months and years ahead so they can invest without the risk of losing that investment if the market goes on the wrong direction.

paraphase: risk (is) very fundamental to modern capitalism and its hairy, wild brother, free enterprise


all this...

For hedge funds the point is usually to ... well, hedge against some other position not working out (if you lend money to a plastics firm, it might go bad if the oil price goes up and thus their primary input cost, so you might buy some oil futures so that the lost money somes back). And so on, it allows complex multi-party financial transactions over a long period of time which makes the whole supply and demand thing we all rely on work more fluidly. Joe Average might see no personal value, but his job is probably made possible by this sort of thing in the background, and his ability to spend his income on stuff he likes almost certainly is.

...sounds like magical thinkin': let's sell stuff that doesn't exist with stuff that has no backin' value ('cept faith)

fine set of duds you got there, emperor

I guess it's fine that you don't understand the parts of capitalism that you can't see. All you need to grok is that it is mostly insurance. Even there, you don't need the complicated bits, those are for the complex economies of the rich world. You will be accessing the simpler parts that service the less complicated needs of resource exporting poor nations, which is what you will be, if you don't have a natural resource then you will be exporting cheap labour, Chinese style, relying on inbound investment. All finance will operate entirely beyond your borders anyway, and the most productive members of your club will therefore be dependent on central banks and regulators, while the rest of your economy will revolve around servicing those people because they are the reliable source of foreign currency.

But he can just hire a bounty hunter and spirit the dude away.

yep, so why announce it?


Probably half of the people in your club-slash-nation won't accept that answer and now want to lynch him. Should they be put to the sword?

probably, but let's face it: he was a scum bag...I won't cry for him, or look to see the mob to get theirs


Probably best if you choose a site for your playground that's far from America, because your friends in Iraq will confirm this is the sort of thing that tends to rile the US armed forces, and they don't have a reputation for offering explanations when they are kicking foreign doors in.

soldiers are welcome


The people responding to these incursions are in some cases endangering innocent members of your own club should there be escalation of hostilities. Does this render them liable for execution?

which people and which incursions? I lost track along the way


This is all fine and stuff from your perspective. But the simple truth is the rest of the world is not going to deal on your terms.

so what? there's always someone sanctioning someone or embargoing someone

it is what it it

No, we embargo other nation states. Your status will be that of a lawless wasteland. Think about it, you'll be offering sanctuary to fleeing criminals of all kinds, in the minds of our voting public that will make you a haven for paedophiles and war criminals, which will be true. You'll be smuggling illicit guns and drugs across somebody's borders, so their voting public will demand action. Eventually you will move from being a curiosity to being an outrage, and then your much more powerful neighbours, with the institutions of an actual state, will have to decide whether to coral you or to police you. Keeping you all in your pit will be the cheaper option for a time, but eventually we have to allow doctors without borders and other charities to gain access to you.

Alternatively, and much more likely but only if it's really quite quick, your internal political pressures will result in the piecemeal reintroduction of the institutions of an actual state, one crisis at a time like everywhere else, but messier because there won't be generations and decades separating out those crises, some of them will happen all at once. But after a couple of particularly worrying religious groups turn up looking for shelter, and a few fleeing criminals and whatnot, you will come under democratic pressure to start filtering who can enter your territory - unfortunately, the white supremacist crowd were probably the first on board, and in your difficult foreign relations situation, you really can't afford to give those guys too much of a voice over this sort of policy. You'll have a crisis over shared public resources, whatever those are, perhaps somebody hunts the turkeys to near extinction to export as burgers for hard currency leaving everyone else needing to import wild turkeys to hunt for fun. Or perhaps it will be water. Either way, there's a shortage of some sort, and some group of large landholders probably gets accused of hoarding. Then there's the scandalously undereducated and malnourished children that some families seem to be churning out at an absurd rate... and so on. You'll find out that this minarchist only three rules deal doesn't actually do quite enough right now, and you need to add just one or two extra rules, every now and then.

Legally you realise we can't actually prosecute people we kidnapped from foreign jurisdictions without due process that is only available through extradition.

that france, for example, has hobbled itself in such a way is the 'murican minarchy's problem how?

he's here...come get him...we won't stop you (unless we got him for sumthin' first)


By the time your population abandoned the project they would be exiting as refugees.

que sera, sera


Seems to me you can't kidnap a person who belongs to himself on nehalf of a foreign power without breaking at least one of those three of necessity. Plus, well, the leashing is not even metaphorical in this case.

seems to me...

if the hunter is a local: he'll know better than to go after a bounty without evidence of life, liberty, or property havin' been deprived..if he does, and others find out, he may end up hunted

...and...

if the hunter is from elsewhere: he better know better than to go after a bounty without evidence of life, liberty, or property havin' been deprived..if he does, and others find out, he may end up hunted

so: be vewy vewy qwiet huntin' wabbit

You wanna know how FDP got that power plant and distribution network? He found out that the owner has enemies in Bulgaria (he banged some political dude's wife) so he made up a story that some guy with a heavy East European accent is at the border looking for a posse, says the guy killed some woman in a hit and run accident and then paid off a cop. So FDP bought the man's property for just enough money to skip town, an offer gratefully accepted by the man who assumes he is quite legally to be handed directly to a mafia hit man and thus decided to get the fuck out of there real fast.

Can you see how I described your situation as the wild west earlier on?

sure...did I disagree with that assessment?

I don't know, how was I meant to interpret "yeah, none of that has anything to do with a natural rights libertarian minarchy"?

Either way, frontier societies such as that only last a certain amount of time, they are subject to internal pressures such as the desire of residents for more predictable justice, as well as disspatory pressures as they are carved apart by warlords, and competitive pressures where neoghbouring states outperform them economically and militarily. Or else, as with the American frontiers, they are simply absorbed into actual civilisation. The movies with the gun slingers and and the bad capitalists with big bags of gold are of course fairy tales, the West was largely incorporated by outside investment that just made it cheap for people to go there and for beef and whatnot to be exported, and the West was thereby plugged into the global economy which sealed its fate as just one more territory to be incorporated, taxed and policed, whether the little men with the scraggly beards panning for gold in some mountain stream liked it or not.

Historically geography and culture have been the main thing preserving anarchic independence - the coastal regions of Sardinia came under Roman control centuries ahead of pacification of the mountainous interior for instance. So perhaps if you find yourself a fetid enough swamp to inhabit, you could get many years of minarchy before outsiders begin to impose on you. But like the unpacified tribes at the interior of so many great empires before you, you need to maintain the most rigid homogeneity, much more than you can hope for if you just let any old stranger who needs to hide out come in and seek shelter.

[henry quirk]

There are differences between free enterprise and theft. These are not natural differences. Dogs eat dogs. Those differences are artificially enshrined in civilised laws and constitutions.

no, the difference is: free enterprise is transaction and theft is deprivation

in the former it's A for B; in the later it's gimme A or I kill your ass

free enterprise is creatin' and exchangin' value; theft is is takin' value

[henry quirk]

I guess it's fine that you don't understand the parts of capitalism that you can't see.

what I understand: what is simple has been complexified solely to benefit profiteers


Your status will be that of a lawless wasteland.

lawless, mebbe, but why a wasteland?


Think about it, you'll be offering sanctuary to fleeing criminals of all kinds

nah...if scum comes, it comes but it ain't sanctuary...as I say: the minarchy won't protect 'em


in the minds of our voting public that will make you a haven for paedophiles and war criminals, which will be true. You'll be smuggling illicit guns and drugs across somebody's borders, so their voting public will demand action. Eventually you will move from being a curiosity to being an outrage, and then your much more powerful neighbours, with the institutions of an actual state, will have to decide whether to coral you or to police you. Keeping you all in your pit will be the cheaper option for a time, but eventually we have to allow doctors without borders and other charities to gain access to you.

fuck the world: bring it on


Alternatively, and much more likely but only if it's really quite quick, your internal political pressures will result in the piecemeal reintroduction of the institutions of an actual state, one crisis at a time like everywhere else,

if the good people of minarchist 'murica opt for this, well, I'll be disappointed...I'll just have to go back to to doin' what I do now


unfortunately, the white supremacist crowd were probably the first on board,

why?


Then there's the scandalously undereducated and malnourished children that some families seem to be churning out at an absurd rate...

self-directin' & -responsible folks don't do that...whimsical, irresponsible types do...the later wouldn't do well in a minarchy...no social net beyond private charities (tun by minarchists who'd take a dim view of poppin' out babies without the means to care for them)


You'll find out that this minarchist only three rules deal doesn't actually do quite enough right now, and you need to add just one or two extra rules, every now and then.

I imagine there'd be any number of rules, all circumstance-specific versions of the three


You wanna know how FDP got that power plant and distribution network? He found out that the owner has enemies in Bulgaria (he banged some political dude's wife) so he made up a story that some guy with a heavy East European accent is at the border looking for a posse, says the guy killed some woman in a hit and run accident and then paid off a cop. So FDP bought the man's property for just enough money to skip town, an offer gratefully accepted by the man who assumes he is quite legally to be handed directly to a mafia hit man and thus decided to get the fuck out of there real fast.

problem with your lil scenario: the fellow is far more likely to have his own security, and to deploy them, than to cut and run

he's a minarchist, not a pussy


frontier societies such as that only last a certain amount of time

trends, not certainties


Historically geography and culture have been the main thing preserving anarchic independence

indeed...'murica offers the geo-variety, existin' philosophy coupled with individual idiosyncrasy offers the culture

[Scott Mayers]

If this is what you BELIEVE is true, then this MUST BE true, to you.

And, if this MUST BE true, to you, then you are OBVIOUSLY NOT open at all in order to be able to learn and understand what thee actual Truth IS.

Age, the "Communist" label is an ideal and why they label their main platform as a party. It might be something like how some party might label their system, "Christian" or "Zionist", as ideal states but in practice requires an evolving system that aims to get to the ideal.

Maybe so. But what is 'true communism', to you?

"Communism" as a label opposes, "Capitalism" with respect to OWNERSHIP.

I am aware of how some people refer to these things, this way.

While we are generally 'capitalistic' in the Western countries, we practice forms of 'social' governments that vary broadly in what they are more specifically.

ALL OF THIS is SO FAR REMOVED from what I am talking about, and referring to.

Sample "communism" are the literal communes and isolated groups, like the Amish, who exist even within Capitalist societies. So these may be considered 'real' but outside of what I assume is meant to refer to whole countries by the OP.

What does 'OP' mean, to you.

To me, the only thing stated in the opening post was;

"There has never been true communism".

Why?

Communism is an ideal form of "anarchy" whereby no one, or everyone collectively, owns more than another just as in a 'commune'. The themes can be different....such as some are religious communes (the Amish) ....or Marxist, a more generalized ideal. The original Christianity was just such during the end of the Greek through the Roman Empire before established by them later. All are presumed to believe that people would volunteer their communal ways, like one big family. However, these ideals are not strictly able to occur.

In practice, the countries that have tried, usually have a 'socialist' or "social democratic" style but adopts some republican concepts (that is, utilize a form of representative government that is elected BY the people but through their particular areas of expertise. For example, the Soviet Union, was a collection of occupation unions whereby workers elect their boss among them. That person then represents your issues related to that occupation and they meet up with any other similar industries from other places in another larger group (soviet) .

This is a form of PURE 'democracy' in the likes of Athens but operates by one's areas of intelligence OR, by most, their labor. [An experienced mechanic, for instance, may be a laborer and learn as they go along to become potentially nominated and elected by coworkers to represent them.] This is 'republican' in a more broader way too, where 'republic' means "for the public" by specialists. The U.S. has one where they utilize a 'college' of intellectuals (original intent that has somewhat faultered in recent times), in which the population doesn't vote directly their political leaders but to some PROXY, who is presumed better skilled. (Today, some who might vote for a "strategic voting" group would trust the collective strategizing that might elect someone from one party in one area but another from a different one, in this way.)

This cascading of votes is like a pyramid that eventually gets to elect the lawyers (or law makers with credible knowlege of legislation). The 'dictator' is actually from the OLD banal meaning, "chairperson". This is the same as the 'speaker of the house' in our Western systems. ...So much of what we hear about Communism is itself false and misleading. They, the communist-leaning countries, interpret us as arrogant dictators but through "inheritance". Their derogatory term for it is "Imperialism" because our systems tend to favor those who OWN with priority, they don't require education nor intellect, and once we vote them in, they rule basically on their own. In Communist countries, the intended ideas was to be MORE democratic in even particular votes, something like the Americans being able to propose bills independently.

I think many here are too emotionally invested in the false beliefs about how their systems work. For instance, why in hell would a "commune" be literally run by their chairman? But propaganda goes both ways.

I think no system works good for too long and so requires constant change. Marx actually recognized this but then overlooked it when he thought he had the solution he suggested in his form of Communism, a leader with 'constitutional' power that can and does often lead to various degrees of 'dictators'. They cannot lead alone though without some counter-deception of their purpose. Those bad leaders though exist anywhere and, just as owners can be arbitrary rulers, it is no surprise that some countries, ....especially ones that begin their Communism in dire poverty and war, tend to have leaders who have specific powers that can undo the intent of the people.

That is all it is in general. What has NOT become real for formal governments attempting it, is the actual system without governors. Note that the right-wing form of anarchy believes in the more literal "imperial" kind: that of INHERITANCE. The worst form in history of this may have been the National Socialists. When private owners rule, they tend to rule by utilizing religion and beliefs that their inheritance was 'earned' by having some inherently good heart that God has granted them uniquely a 'right to rule' regardless of the people or whether these leaders are intellectual by any means.

[Age]

Age, the "Communist" label is an ideal and why they label their main platform as a party. It might be something like how some party might label their system, "Christian" or "Zionist", as ideal states but in practice requires an evolving system that aims to get to the ideal.

Maybe so. But what is 'true communism', to you?

"Communism" as a label opposes, "Capitalism" with respect to OWNERSHIP.

I am aware of how some people refer to these things, this way.

While we are generally 'capitalistic' in the Western countries, we practice forms of 'social' governments that vary broadly in what they are more specifically.

ALL OF THIS is SO FAR REMOVED from what I am talking about, and referring to.

Sample "communism" are the literal communes and isolated groups, like the Amish, who exist even within Capitalist societies. So these may be considered 'real' but outside of what I assume is meant to refer to whole countries by the OP.

What does 'OP' mean, to you.

To me, the only thing stated in the opening post was;

"There has never been true communism".

Why?

Communism is an ideal form of "anarchy" whereby no one, or everyone collectively, owns more than another just as in a 'commune'. The themes can be different....such as some are religious communes (the Amish) ....or Marxist, a more generalized ideal. The original Christianity was just such during the end of the Greek through the Roman Empire before established by them later. All are presumed to believe that people would volunteer their communal ways, like one big family. However, these ideals are not strictly able to occur.

In practice, the countries that have tried, usually have a 'socialist' or "social democratic" style but adopts some republican concepts (that is, utilize a form of representative government that is elected BY the people but through their particular areas of expertise. For example, the Soviet Union, was a collection of occupation unions whereby workers elect their boss among them. That person then represents your issues related to that occupation and they meet up with any other similar industries from other places in another larger group (soviet) .

This is a form of PURE 'democracy' in the likes of Athens but operates by one's areas of intelligence OR, by most, their labor. [An experienced mechanic, for instance, may be a laborer and learn as they go along to become potentially nominated and elected by coworkers to represent them.] This is 'republican' in a more broader way too, where 'republic' means "for the public" by specialists. The U.S. has one where they utilize a 'college' of intellectuals (original intent that has somewhat faultered in recent times), in which the population doesn't vote directly their political leaders but to some PROXY, who is presumed better skilled. (Today, some who might vote for a "strategic voting" group would trust the collective strategizing that might elect someone from one party in one area but another from a different one, in this way.)

This cascading of votes is like a pyramid that eventually gets to elect the lawyers (or law makers with credible knowlege of legislation). The 'dictator' is actually from the OLD banal meaning, "chairperson". This is the same as the 'speaker of the house' in our Western systems. ...So much of what we hear about Communism is itself false and misleading. They, the communist-leaning countries, interpret us as arrogant dictators but through "inheritance". Their derogatory term for it is "Imperialism" because our systems tend to favor those who OWN with priority, they don't require education nor intellect, and once we vote them in, they rule basically on their own. In Communist countries, the intended ideas was to be MORE democratic in even particular votes, something like the Americans being able to propose bills independently.

I think many here are too emotionally invested in the false beliefs about how their systems work. For instance, why in hell would a "commune" be literally run by their chairman? But propaganda goes both ways.

I think no system works good for too long and so requires constant change. Marx actually recognized this but then overlooked it when he thought he had the solution he suggested in his form of Communism, a leader with 'constitutional' power that can and does often lead to various degrees of 'dictators'. They cannot lead alone though without some counter-deception of their purpose. Those bad leaders though exist anywhere and, just as owners can be arbitrary rulers, it is no surprise that some countries, ....especially ones that begin their Communism in dire poverty and war, tend to have leaders who have specific powers that can undo the intent of the people.

That is all it is in general. What has NOT become real for formal governments attempting it, is the actual system without governors. Note that the right-wing form of anarchy believes in the more literal "imperial" kind: that of INHERITANCE. The worst form in history of this may have been the National Socialists. When private owners rule, they tend to rule by utilizing religion and beliefs that their inheritance was 'earned' by having some inherently good heart that God has granted them uniquely a 'right to rule' regardless of the people or whether these leaders are intellectual by any means.

As I wrote previously;

ALL OF THIS is SO FAR REMOVED from what I am talking about, and referring to.

[Age]

There are differences between free enterprise and theft. These are not natural differences. Dogs eat dogs. Those differences are artificially enshrined in civilised laws and constitutions.

no, the difference is: free enterprise is transaction and theft is deprivation

Remember this when you are DEPRIVING "others" from what they NEED.

And I am NOT talking about television sets, computers, NOT spatulas.

in the former it's A for B; in the later it's gimme A or I kill your ass

free enterprise is creatin' and exchangin' value; theft is is takin' value

And just about ALL of what you have written leads to 'taking value' from "others".

[Age]

"history does not run on rails"

had to do my bookwork...I get it...and you're right: ain't no guarantees about tomorrow...some clever bastard could develop soma, addict the world, reduce man to automaton...some smarty-pants (lookin' at you, elon musk, with your neural link) could develop tech makin' it easy to edit behavior & drive and turn us all into good lil cogs...beer virus could mutate, becomin' captain trips; an asteroid might smite us; a real, all-out atomic exchange might happen; and on and on and on...

but, this is not a remarkable observation

most folks get: trends don't equate to certainties

still, seen over the long-haul, the move is away from mass slavery toward individual freedom

And yet here is "henry quirk", who is just ANOTHER 'cog' in the wheel of Life.