RE: URGENT: The European Union is Weeks Away From Passing a Rule That Would Destroy The Best Things About The Internet!

[ura-soul]

'Chip in' means to donate or give support/help.
'Making government irrelevant' is the way forwards, so that we collectively function harmoniously and their 'services' are recognised to have no value.

Comments

[stimialiti]

I did not write and did not mean to make government irrelevant.
It is impossible and will lead to results that are further from your ideals than the current state.
Here are elaborations about it:
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@stimialiti/anarchy-s-fate-is-to-succumb-to-coercion
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@stimialiti/an-example-of-anarchy

I referred explicitly to the law which your thread is about.

[ura-soul]

Anarchy is a state of non rulers. Coercion and warlords are a form of ruling others - therefore anarchy ends where warlords and coercion begin.

[stimialiti]

And it brings its own end similar to how leaving a piece of meat to rot.
A return to anarchy is a huge setback, back to the bronze age, or something in its vicinity.

Did you bother to read my threads about it which I linked you to?

[ura-soul]

I read some of them, yes - however, we are using entirely different definitions for the practical application of anarchy. Bronze age, as I understand it, was not anarchy. I am not aware of any examples of large scale anarchy, since that would mean no violence and no overpowering of others and our historians claim no such examples as far as I am aware.

[stimialiti]

I read some of them, yes

I linked you to 2 specific threads

• however, we are using entirely different definitions for the practical application of anarchy.

I am still not aware of it.

Bronze age, as I understand it, was not anarchy.

I guess it is because took more than anarchy even to get to there.

I am not aware of any examples of large scale anarchy, since that would mean no violence and no overpowering of others and our historians claim no such examples as far as I am aware.

Because anarchy is unsustainable and leads to more violence and worse tyrannical regimes.

[ura-soul]

Because anarchy is unsustainable and leads to more violence and worse tyrannical regimes.

As already stated, Anarchy cannot sustain violence, since violence itself requires a 'ruler' and that is, by definition, the opposite of anarchy. That is part of how we are using different definitions for anarchy.

I think you are missing that the moment anyone overpowers anyone else, they are 'ruling' them - albeit perhaps without actual written rules.

[stimialiti]

As already stated, Anarchy cannot sustain violence, since violence itself requires a 'ruler' and that is, by definition, the opposite of anarchy. That is part of how we are using different definitions for anarchy.

Anarchy leads to violence, and to its own demise.
Anarchy is an unstable state.
Unstable states tend to collapse to stable states.

I think you are missing that the moment anyone overpowers anyone else, they are 'ruling' them - albeit perhaps without actual written rules.

And under anarchy it is easier than under a uniform rule which monopolizes the use of violence.

[voteme]

You got a 83.33% upvote from @voteme courtesy of @stimialiti! For next round, send minimum 0.01 SBD to bid for upvote.

Do you know, you can also earn daily passive income simply by delegating your Steem Power to voteme by clicking following links: 10SP, 25SP, 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.

[luckyvotes]

You got a 33.33% upvote from @luckyvotes courtesy of @stimialiti!

[luckyvotes]

You got a 50.00% upvote from @luckyvotes courtesy of @stimialiti!