Introduce yourself here

[Francois Tremblay]

Welcome!

[MustangGT]

Welcome Stuffguru. We are interested in education and the spreading of our ideas right now and setting up groups to that effect. We need to spread the word that moral society is a free society, and that all we need is our own self-determination

[Dadalama]

I've been here a while on the other boards but I'm Chris. Probably far from the smartest person here but I hope I won't get in the way.

My interest in market anarchy is more that it is a good cheap and workable alternative to the state. But in and of itself the state might be more of a symptom of some other idiocy than the main idiocy. Perhaps it's the social norms or even the idea of order (order itself can and does exist without the pusher, but for some reason people see it differently). I just think it goes deeper than the political idea that the state is inherently wrong. Or there's something more wrong that spawns the idea of statism.

I've been called an anomist before....

[NoDeity]

Hi, Chris. I'm Brad.

But in and of itself the state might be more of a symptom of some other idiocy than the main idiocy.

Perhaps both theism and statism are symptoms of not wanting to or not being allowed to grow up.

I've been called an anomist before....

Well, the thing is to distinguish between natural law and imposed law.

[Sparx]

Perhaps both theism and statism are symptoms of not wanting to or not being allowed to grow up.

I think so, too. Learning to be responsible, getting rid of the inner child.
We still live in a statist society because most people are psychologically unhealthy.

[Dadalama]

Hi, Chris. I'm Brad.

But in and of itself the state might be more of a symptom of some other idiocy than the main idiocy.

Perhaps both theism and statism are symptoms of not wanting to or not being allowed to grow up.

I've been called an anomist before....

Well, the thing is to distinguish between natural law and imposed law.

Hi Brad

Confederalsocialist said a similar thing in one of his videos. That government is an extension of the family. It fills the gap of not having the infallible mother figure from your childhood. I do agree with that but I think alot has to do with the fact that government is also an extension of the tribe. And humans were pack hunters and social animals for a long time. That's fine because we naturally do that grouping in our day to day social lives but a government is a very large tribe. And our primitive mind thinks "oh wow, this tribe is so strong! I want to be strong!". It seems a combination of what Timothy Leary called the second and fourth circuits. Not that I take the 8 circuit model of human consciousness that seriously but, it's damn good tool to explain behaviors.

<regarding natural law>

perhaps, but natural law isn't a set of rules.

[irrational]

Hey every one. I have joined the threads. I have lurked for a while now, but maybe I will post from time to time.

Ryan

[Noor]

Yeah, I post once in a while here, but I'm more of a lurker too.

[tism]

Hello.

I was born a statist, and was one for most of my life. Then I read Atlas Shrugged and became an Objectivist. Then I became interested in politics and became a Libertarian.

Then I realized that I was still full of shit, and I became an anarchist. But I am not sure what kind of anarchist, just the kind that is the least interested in intervention, and believes strongly in the law of unintended consequences.

I've been reading Franc's site for a while and that is how I found this board, and I thought I should start posting here since everyone seems to be (relatively) level-headed in discussing philosophical issues.

I'm mainly interested in uncovering contradictions in the way people think, including myself. Since I have stopped being a statist I've found it easy to notice the contradictions and eliminate them from my thoughts. I've noticed that most people don't care about contradictions and can frequently find (inadequate) ways to explain them, by coming up with brand-new exceptions to the existing rules they are already following.

I think that if people understood the contradictions in the way they think and live, we would have a lot less problems.

So anyway, hi.

[NoDeity]

<regarding natural law>

perhaps, but natural law isn't a set of rules.

True. At best, rules are an attempt to reflect natural law.

[samski]

Hello, I am Sam.

I am also mainly a lurker, although I do find myself posting every now and then, which I usually then regret, as I am not the best at articulating myself, and often forget my point before i have made it. I am learning alot at the moment, and found the forum through my exploration of the internet. When i first joined it was due to the fact that i had just discovered atheism, and found it answered allot of questions i had been having. Since i have joined i have changed allot, and find myself disliking who used to be, and so apologise for some of my more stupid posts, i am also just discovering anarchy, through the board mainly, but am not yet at a stage where i can label myself as any kind of anarchist, as i do not yet know what the different branches all encompass.

The main reason I'm here is to learn, I have lots of questions to ask, but don't think i am ready to ask them yet.

[Dadalama]

<regarding natural law>

perhaps, but natural law isn't a set of rules.

True. At best, rules are an attempt to reflect natural law.

yeah, let's take death as a tool as an example. Natural law usually requires us to kill to eat, yet usually we are wired to feel bad about killing our own species. There are exceptions, of course, based on both the person and the situation. Yet situations were violence is needed to each other is rare, and during those times it's more to intimidate then to end lives (punching someone in the face because he's trying to bully you into something is an example for our younger crew).
But when people start using their ability to reason in order to organize, they start making up rules and morals. And these rules are abstractions of natural rules that eventually grow into horrible mutations of nature. So if you were to shed these arbitrary abstractions of nature then alot of the problems of cultish behavior might be thwarted. But you have three things in the way, you have these "illusions" of not being whole without a power structure, you have the veneration of shows of power itself and then there is the illusion of nature not being able to create it's own structure.
Anarchism is, in the idealistic sense, is just treating the symptom. However, pragmatically it's a better system all around. But only without adjectives. Yet without the two illusions and the veneration destroyed, we'd keep following down the same path in other ways. So I guess I just made a tl;dr repeating of myself. Damn...

[Too Samski]
well hope you walk away with some positivity from here.

[Nick. B]

Hey everyone. Well my name is Nick Barker, I am a free market anarchist, like you, and I admit I am still learning about the ideas behind it. I will propably post quite frequently, in hopes of learning as much as possible. I also hope to find other site and organisations that focus on free market anarchy, so if you know of any please notify me, it will be greatly appreciated.

[gisys]

I'm Sean and I hereby disclaim myself.

[KinglessClay]

Hiya, folks.

I'm currently a student actor, stage director, and playwright. I live in northern California, an odd eclectic community that has actually released a local private currency which I find to be pretty funny. Philosophically I have been circling voluntary anarchy for a while but I still have some problems with it. So I figured I'll check this place out in order to see if these problems are surmountable, or if they are even problems at all. First off, it seems to me that Adam Smith's argument that self interested behavior will reap unintended positive consequences is self evident, however the street runs both ways by my observation. Unintended negative consequences of self interested behavior are just as likely seems to me. Hope you can help.

KinglessClay