It seems in this day and age that we are stuck with paying taxes to a government we do not approve of. Coersive taxation has taken on a new meaning. Now not only do we not approve of things they are spending our tax dollars on, but many of us do not approve of the government at all. I like ideas which make anarchism/libertarianism plausible.
Usually when people think about anarchism it is either a negative thought influenced by too many news stories and punk bands (semi-sarcastic), or they think of it positively, but have doubts or questions about how well it would actually work. We have seen fascism fall. We have seen dictatorships fall. We have seen communism and socialism fall. And we have seen capitalism under the control of the state begin to fall.
The United States is in a financial crisis. How much more proof do we need that government is not there for us? Do we have to see them give every last one of our hard earned dollars away to companies like AIG, General Motors, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Washington Mutual etc.? There is so much contrast in the U.S. government between capitalism and socialism that there is no way it could work. Two very different economic models working against eachother is what we're seeing.
Counter Economics is as described "any action based on free will which the government has prohibited". Now there are people buying drugs and prostitutes and illegal guns every day. While this is technically counter economics, the drive behind the action is to give strength to the black market for a political reason. The more things you buy from the black market, the more you work under the table, hire illegal immigrants/under the table workers, the more you have a part in the underground economy the less the government will get out of you.
The purpose of this is to slowly (or hopefully quickly) outnumber the government and have a stronger black market than the white market. This will in theory enable private security companies to strengthen and bring charges like theft for the government's taxation. It sounds a bit wild, but as long as things went according to plan, it's actually very likely.
Imagine if the security forces now had a larger market of people to sell their services to. If these security forces became the primary security for people, and people relied on them as much or more than the "police" then when police tried to go against the will of the people, the people would ask their security company to arrest the offender. At the moment it's hard to imagine private companies outnumbering the police. But if we could accomplish this then we would have taken care of two problems. The first being that we wouldn't have to pay taxes. The second is that we have essentially privatized police forces. Even if the tax payed police still existedit would still essentially be a free market for security. Much like how today we have private insurance companies, but we still have Medicare. They can function side by side well enough. But it would be preferred to have no public police force.
Here are some examples of counter economic actions:
*Selling/Traffiking, Buying Drugs, narcotics, pharmecuticals, and bootleg liquor
*Traffiking guns, ammo, or other weaponry
*Buying food directly from farmers without taxes payed
*tax evasion
*relying on private security as opposed to police
Finally, here is a short clip from Wikipedia about counter economics. They can say it better than I can: [Used without permission from Wikipedia. Fuck them.]
Konkin's agorism, as exposited in his New Libertarian Manifesto[3], postulates that the correct method of achieving a market anarchist society is through advocacy and growth of the underground economy or "black market" -- the "counter-economy" as Konkin put it—until such a point that the State's perceived moral authority and outright power have been so thoroughly undermined that revolutionary market anarchist legal and security enterprises are able to arise from underground and ultimately suppress government as a criminal activity (with taxation being treated as theft, war being treated as mass murder, et cetera).
According to Konkin's pamphlet Counter-Economics[4]:
Usually when people think about anarchism it is either a negative thought influenced by too many news stories and punk bands (semi-sarcastic), or they think of it positively, but have doubts or questions about how well it would actually work. We have seen fascism fall. We have seen dictatorships fall. We have seen communism and socialism fall. And we have seen capitalism under the control of the state begin to fall.
The United States is in a financial crisis. How much more proof do we need that government is not there for us? Do we have to see them give every last one of our hard earned dollars away to companies like AIG, General Motors, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Washington Mutual etc.? There is so much contrast in the U.S. government between capitalism and socialism that there is no way it could work. Two very different economic models working against eachother is what we're seeing.
Counter Economics is as described "any action based on free will which the government has prohibited". Now there are people buying drugs and prostitutes and illegal guns every day. While this is technically counter economics, the drive behind the action is to give strength to the black market for a political reason. The more things you buy from the black market, the more you work under the table, hire illegal immigrants/under the table workers, the more you have a part in the underground economy the less the government will get out of you.
The purpose of this is to slowly (or hopefully quickly) outnumber the government and have a stronger black market than the white market. This will in theory enable private security companies to strengthen and bring charges like theft for the government's taxation. It sounds a bit wild, but as long as things went according to plan, it's actually very likely.
Imagine if the security forces now had a larger market of people to sell their services to. If these security forces became the primary security for people, and people relied on them as much or more than the "police" then when police tried to go against the will of the people, the people would ask their security company to arrest the offender. At the moment it's hard to imagine private companies outnumbering the police. But if we could accomplish this then we would have taken care of two problems. The first being that we wouldn't have to pay taxes. The second is that we have essentially privatized police forces. Even if the tax payed police still existedit would still essentially be a free market for security. Much like how today we have private insurance companies, but we still have Medicare. They can function side by side well enough. But it would be preferred to have no public police force.
Here are some examples of counter economic actions:
*Selling/Traffiking, Buying Drugs, narcotics, pharmecuticals, and bootleg liquor
*Traffiking guns, ammo, or other weaponry
*Buying food directly from farmers without taxes payed
*tax evasion
*relying on private security as opposed to police
Finally, here is a short clip from Wikipedia about counter economics. They can say it better than I can: [Used without permission from Wikipedia. Fuck them.]
Konkin's agorism, as exposited in his New Libertarian Manifesto[3], postulates that the correct method of achieving a market anarchist society is through advocacy and growth of the underground economy or "black market" -- the "counter-economy" as Konkin put it—until such a point that the State's perceived moral authority and outright power have been so thoroughly undermined that revolutionary market anarchist legal and security enterprises are able to arise from underground and ultimately suppress government as a criminal activity (with taxation being treated as theft, war being treated as mass murder, et cetera).
According to Konkin's pamphlet Counter-Economics[4]:
No comments:
Post a Comment