"Anarchists are not saying governments do not provide services."
Actually, yes, we are. There is no "service" that government "provides" without first violating the right to self-ownership of others via theft. Government provides nothing that it doesn't TAKE unjustly first.To @andrarchy -- close.
The entire point is that having inconsistently applied rules for and in society (exceptions to the rule - gods of men) creates chaos. Anarchy is order, government is chaos.
doesn't. Period. So why not try freedom? What's to lose, when government is bringing Earth to hell in a handbasket?
What - we might not have Armageddon?Thus, @seafood, the issue isn't so much whether anarchy would work, but the knowledge that, most assuredly, government
We're heading straight to that, thanks to government, the idea that,
without having a supreme ruler [class], there would be but chaos.
What an Orwellian twist on freedom!
So, to answer your questions:
- "How do individuals in an anarchist setting protect themselves from aggressors?"
By not systematically empowering people to aggress. By systematically creating a society that respects the rights of individuals, rather than a society where there are individuals who are exceptions to the rules of society. - "Now I know you think that everyone should just do the right thing, and I'm sure the majority would, but there are always some bad people out there. How exactly do we protect ourselves from them?"
What - you think that making a class of people that are exempt from the rules everyone else follows will somehow bring about peace? Why would you expect anything other than injustice, chaos, deception, and systematic and eternal manipulation of the energy of the people who are under the thumb of the rulers? THAT'S how you defend yourself against the bad people? But putting your life, liberty, freedom, and children STRAIGHT into their hands?
If, instead, people defended the rights of all, how could such horrible individuals, who would stand out like a sore thumb, be able to overpower millions of people, each of whom are part of a chain of life that they depend on, from food, to water, to socialization (without which, people go mad), to everything you can think of? - "Do we form a group, or a coalition to fight them off?"
Yes. We have. We're anarchists, and when enough people stop defending the sociopaths and putting them in power with millions of little tax tid-bits, the systematic chaos of continuous and systematic rights violations will end. - "If we do something like that might it not be necessary to fund that group?"
Private police, if they do harm, their reputation is lost, and no-one will hire them. If what they're doing is necessary, their customers (you and everyone else) will fund it, because you're the one paying them. If you don't need it, they don't get it. - "Might we not ask for some kind of funding to help our brave protectors keep us safe. Wait... is that just taxes by another name?"
Not if it's voluntary. Taxes aren't. If you don't pay, you get a death threat. There is no means or measure to gauge of customer satisfaction. That's why a monopoly on force never improves past the bare necessities to keep people in line but not rebelling. The hope is that people will eventually be sheep enough that they can take their lives without an eyebrow lifting. That is the dawn of human extermination to preserve the social elite.
"I have grown up in a very safe society"
Police murder people (and their dogs) on a daily basis. Well, at least we aren't in continuous warfare like in the kingdom days. Oh wait... Iraq.
Well, at least you're the property of the biggest bully on the block.
Only HE is allowed to beat you up and treat you like shit.
NO ONE ELSE! Protection, baby!