No, no he got a point.
(media.ancaps.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (23)
sorted by:
Both.
As a zillion micronations compete, the top brains and capital relocate for their self-interest. It's reasonable to make such predictions based on clear historical trends, but no one has a "crystal ball". I am an empiricist, I want those experiments to play out, and everyone will analyze the data and decide for themselves. The Free Market / Evolution will decide...
There is a positive correlation between intelligence and success in a free market (or at least appreciation of the free market). There are still lots of exceptions, because a lot of high-IQ people make themselves dependent on government funding (teachers' unions, college professors, government-funded R&D). But they still need more high-IQ people in the private sector to pay the taxes, and to maintain the faith in government currency and credit. Those exceptions would decrease as the private sector grows more in freer jurisdictions, and government funding ultimately dries up.
When you have enough intergovernmental competition and people voting with their feet and wallets, any "government" then becomes "voluntary governance", just another corporation. Not that much difference between managing say a private cruise line and managing a seastead, or between Disneyland and San Marino.
I think I understand your feet and wallets idea. But many governments are not making the change. For (e.g.) a federal government to lose power, their must be a nationwide redpilling which I do not see coming. There is a growing sentiment of wanting to use the government which I do not see diminishing any time within the next couple hundred years (the demand is for more government, not less). So this idea of voluntary governance is not something I see coming unless we have another round of founding fathers to revolt.
There are limits to government power.
It is a faith-based institution, based on the popular belief in its necessity and benevolence. Take away that faith, and they have nothing but trillions in debt and hundreds of millions of angry "citizens" demanding free stuff.
Whenever governments do stuff like Waco and Ruby Ridge, they risk the sheep starting to question their benevolence. Those incidents involved very small amounts of people who did a lot of foolish things - we can do a lot better, starting with Gandhiesque principles and 21st century telecommunications. Their ability to censor the Internet is also limited to low-IQ phonetards; smart people know a way around it.
Smart, principled, freedom-loving people will always be in minority, but even a few thousand of us would be enough for a determined peaceful secession movement. I've been a tax resister since 2004, waiting for the rest of you to catch up to me. ?
The Free State Project was a good idea that went bad (because no one listens to poor Alex Libman, boo hoo) - we have to learn from their mistakes and try again!
We just need a small crack in the dam, one little Liechtenstein that gains sovereignty. It's best to target an island with nearly no local population (plenty of those in Alaska, for example - my first choice for the FSP). Once one tiny libertarian secession movement is successful, there will be thousands and then millions more!
The optimism is reassuring. As someone who is not yet paying taxes (2004 baby), I have half a mind to resist too. I would participate in the secession myself and while I am sure that you already know this, keep in mind that we have instances of governance in everything that we do. We are governed by hunger, curiosity and embarrassment (as we should be). I don't want to eliminate all law and order here. Especially as a social conservative. Ancapistan sounds nice!