Anarchism - Anything goes

smurf975 · 2004-07-22 15:50:45

I think this should be the best system for Mars as it will allow communities to decide what the want them selfs withoiut some global or solar government.

~Eternal~ · 2004-07-22 16:02:36

Anarcho-Communism? That'd work but most unlikey, Anarcho-Capitalism, more unlikely.

smurf975 · 2004-07-22 16:06:37

Its not Communism nor Capitalism but doing what works for the community.

Its more like federalisme taken to the extreme.

Aetius · 2004-07-22 17:41:50

What if a Martian city 'decides' that female slavery "works for the community"? White supremacy? Islamo-fascism?

I'm not saying that I believe that I have the right to dictate what forms of government should be available to Martians.

I'm just curious as to how a self-described anarchist feels about such possibilities. I support the idea of a cultural mosaic on Mars, bound to the Earth-Moon system by treaty and trade. A government with planetary-scale taxation and enforcement powers is anathema to me.

Josh Cryer · 2004-07-22 19:15:36

Heh, I think there's a significant misunderstanding here of what anarchism is...

Rxke · 2004-07-23 02:48:51

Isn't anarchism, as political (contradiction in terms?) about the highest degree of personal freedom, but combined with getting along, and working together with fellow humans? And the highest degree of personal responsibility? (accountable for your own deeds)

So slavery is a no no.

Of course, there are gazillions flavours of anarchisms, i guess...

DERF · 2004-07-23 09:08:26

Isn't anarchism, as political (contradiction in terms?) about the highest degree of personal freedom, but combined with getting along, and working together with fellow humans?

One of the most hilarious parts of Bowling for Columbine was when a girl was suspended (or in some way punished) for trying to form an "anarchist club"....that's right folks...an "anarchist club" at her school.

Yes, anarchy is silly and impossible. If earth government declares that "Mars will be an anarchic society!" then it means they just choose not to acknowledge the government that WILL form there. Humans join in packs and organize better together - we are used to it since we are doing it for thousands of years. Declaring something an anarchy is just denying to yourself the organization that exists there.

clark · 2004-07-23 09:48:15

Anarchy slogan: "You're not the boss of me!"

I heard a four year old say it once...

BWhite · 2004-07-23 10:28:18

Anarchy slogan: "You're not the boss of me!"
I heard a four year old say it once...

Or as my daughter once said (at age four):

"You're not the Big Brain in charge of my mind!"

= = =

Now, at age 10 1/2, I witnesed this:

"Mom! You just gotta learn that I am going to make my own decisions. Deal with it!"

Teen-age years have arrived early!

= = =

With such people reverse psychology controls them quite nicely. An inability to say "Yes!" can be as bad as an inability to say "No!"

True anarchists need to understand when it is appropriate to obey. :;):

~Eternal~ · 2004-07-23 11:11:44

Anarchy slogan: "You're not the boss of me!"
I heard a four year old say it once...
Or as my daughter once said (at age four):
"You're not the Big Brain in charge of my mind!"
= = =
Now, at age 10 1/2, I witnesed this:
"Mom! You just gotta learn that I am going to make my own decisions. Deal with it!"
Teen-age years have arrived early!
= = =
With such people reverse psychology controls them quite nicely. An inability to say "Yes!" can be as bad as an inability to say "No!"
True anarchists need to understand when it is appropriate to obey. :;):

Wait till she's fourteen

Always remember BWhite, when those young gentlemen come over, you sit right next to em' look at him in the eyes, and say 'Listen to me boy, thats my precious daughter, and if you have any thoughs about kissing or hugging, well I have to tell you right now, I have no problem going back to prison.'

smurf975 · 2004-08-04 12:35:06

Isn't anarchism, as political (contradiction in terms?) about the highest degree of personal freedom, but combined with getting along, and working together with fellow humans?
One of the most hilarious parts of Bowling for Columbine was when a girl was suspended (or in some way punished) for trying to form an "anarchist club"....that's right folks...an "anarchist club" at her school.
Yes, anarchy is silly and impossible. If earth government declares that "Mars will be an anarchic society!" then it means they just choose not to acknowledge the government that WILL form there. Humans join in packs and organize better together - we are used to it since we are doing it for thousands of years. Declaring something an anarchy is just denying to yourself the organization that exists there.

Isn't anarchism, as political (contradiction in terms?) about the highest degree of personal freedom, but combined with getting along, and working together with fellow humans?

I think this should be true in reality for any society!

---

I don't see anarchy as a government less political system. It’s just a lean and mean national government. So just foreign affairs / international trade and defense (military) and perhaps big projects such as dam building and space program. Something that will affect all citizens.

All the other stuff is done by local governments. And those (state/ provinces) governments will again be limited. However they will be able to raise taxes for infrastructure, healthcare, police and other stuff.

Basically the people will have the power not the burocracy

mr mirana · 2005-10-10 06:09:40

So much misunderstanding.
You guys seem to think, RE: Bowling for Columbine, that 'anarchist club' is some kind of oxymoron. This in turn implies that you think anarchism means, 'the absence of co-operation or association with others.' No, guys, very very no.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Ar … archy.html
http://www.panarchy.org/kropotkin/1896.eng.html

And finally,
http://www.newsfromnowhere.org.uk/books … 0006862454

evilcitizen · 2005-10-21 18:59:04

Anarchy would never work unless they also happen to be billionaires capable of paying their own way to Mars, paying for habitat, protection, etc. That is NEVER going to happen.

Are people suggesting that governments will simply take on the huge burden of sending people to Mars simply so they can brake off and create their own "anarchic" societies?

It seems to me that colonizing other planets always seems to bring out everbody's deepest dreams about their own "perfect society", many of which have been tried and failed, back on Earth.

Leifur · 2005-11-08 13:36:44

Anarchy would never work unless they also happen to be billionaires capable of paying their own way to Mars, paying for habitat, protection, etc. That is NEVER going to happen.
Are people suggesting that governments will simply take on the huge burden of sending people to Mars simply so they can brake off and create their own "anarchic" societies?
It seems to me that colonizing other planets always seems to bring out everbody's deepest dreams about their own "perfect society", many of which have been tried and failed, back on Earth.

Of course you are right about the last sentence, although many of the societial dreams have not been tested, or like in my instance, been tested, and was succesful in its purest form until destroyed from abroad.

And you are also correct that if a government will send people to Mars to settle, they would consider the settlement as an exstension of itself and thus bound by their rules and laws. But once people are on Mars, a scenario similar to that in Kim Stanley Robinson´s book Red Mars, of some people braking off and creating their own societies is propably.

Your fist sentence is then correct in the sense that either people would have to be rich enough to pay for their trip, or more likely, technological achiewments would have to be able to provide such a trip cheap enough. And I totally disagree on the likelyhood of that happening, as I am convinced that will eventually happen and a permanent settlement on Mars will not be until that day.

Anarcho-Communism? That'd work but most unlikey, Anarcho-Capitalism, more unlikely.

Exactly the opposite. A frontier world as communistic? I just laugh at the idea, as the opportunities such a frontier would give individuals would never fit into a communistic system (even though anarkistic), wich would hinder all development.

An arcistic system can not work unless i allows for private property. Such Anarco-Capitalistic system could be ideal for such a frontier world, and it would allow people that would want to live in less anarcistic societies to create their own enclaves within itself.

noosfractal · 2005-11-09 02:29:19

A difference between the Martian frontier and, say, the American frontier, is the restricted options for someone who is dissatisfied in a community. Especially at first, there will be resources that cannot be created on Mars. One example is power. Power is not merely a luxury on Mars, it is essential to survival for any significant period of time. A single person or small group deciding to break-off from a larger group must acquire sufficient power generating resources.

But look at the power generation options for Mars: nuclear, solar, fuel cell. Local manufacture of nuclear generators and fuel just isn't going to happen anytime soon after settlement. Local solar or fuel cell manufacture is more likely, but each involves specialist equipment and/or materials (e.g., dopants, fuel cell membranes) that make it easy for a single group or even a single person to monopolize the ability to produce new power generation capacity.

I'm sure power isn't the only vital area where such monopolies could arise. The point being that it may be easy for a monopoly to disallow establishment of competitive settlements if there is no higher authority explicitly requiring that they be allowed. In this situation, the frontier could look a lot less entrepreneurial and a lot more centrally planned than I imagine you'd like.

I think true independence will require quite advanced personal fabrication technology.
_

Josh Cryer · 2005-11-09 12:15:50

And once we have advanced fabrication technology I think it would be quite easy for anarchism to form.

I have the feeling that colonizing Mars wouldn't even happen until we had that kind of technology.

clark · 2005-11-09 13:17:03

And once we have advanced fabrication technology I think it would be quite easy for anarchism to form.

What, like velcro?

noosfractal · 2005-11-09 14:50:01

And once we have advanced fabrication technology I think it would be quite easy for anarchism to form.

Some technologies, like personal fabrication, enable anarchy, but there seem to be plenty of others that further strengthen hierarchies. Economies of scale are difficult to compete with, and they benefit from hitech as well.

Pre-terraforming, I think the inherently fragile nature of habitats will require fairly tightly regulated communities. Individual rebellion or just lack of discipline could too easily be fatal to an entire community.
_

Eigon · 2006-01-02 09:07:06

My brother in law lives in an anarcho-syndicalist commune in Germany, and has for several years now. It works very well, and is the largest and oldest such group in Germany, with around 70 adults and 20 children.
Major decisions are made in weekly meetings, with a rotating chairman. Each member is able to take as much or as little petty cash as they want for personal needs, up to a certain limit - so if you think a CD collection is essential to your happiness, that's fine. Children can choose whether they want to live with their parents or with other children in the group.
My brother in law spent some time looking after the cows on the commune farm, and had his own radio show on Radio Free Kassel, and he was able to give these up for a six month sabbatical to visit other communes in Britain, Germany and Italy.
Anarcho-syndicalism works very well.
So do the kibbutzim in Israel, or they did in their hey-day of 1950s to 1970s - I'm not so sure about more recently as I'm out of touch now.

Josh Cryer · 2006-01-02 14:22:47

And once we have advanced fabrication technology I think it would be quite easy for anarchism to form.
Some technologies, like personal fabrication, enable anarchy, but there seem to be plenty of others that further strengthen hierarchies. Economies of scale are difficult to compete with, and they benefit from hitech as well.
Pre-terraforming, I think the inherently fragile nature of habitats will require fairly tightly regulated communities. Individual rebellion or just lack of discipline could too easily be fatal to an entire community.

What do you mean by economies of scale? I think that personal fabrication technology destroys all economics as we know them. Especially in a desolate place like Mars where government and resource monoplies would be hard to acquire.

Consider aluminum/bauxite, only found in significant quantities in like 4 countries in the whole world (it is of course found in the earth's crust in every location in the world). On earth it would be terribly difficult to make a claim on these abundant resources without pissing off those who have already set up methods to extract them, but on Mars there is simply no one there making these claims. Any any corporation that was stupid enough to do so would fall quite quickly once the threat of war was looming (and it wouldn't be the corporation making the decition to give up the resources, the workers themselves would be totally apathetic to the corporation, they could easily be convinced to let loose the resources for everyones, including theirselves, benefit).

I think the fragility of habitats would be a plus for anarchism, because anarchism respects individual soverignity, it does not respect collective corporatism. A corporation would be highly suceptable to rebellion.

Sorry, not spellchecked, I'm just rambling, didn't see this post until now.

Grypd · 2006-01-02 16:42:01

And once we have advanced fabrication technology I think it would be quite easy for anarchism to form.
Some technologies, like personal fabrication, enable anarchy, but there seem to be plenty of others that further strengthen hierarchies. Economies of scale are difficult to compete with, and they benefit from hitech as well.
Pre-terraforming, I think the inherently fragile nature of habitats will require fairly tightly regulated communities. Individual rebellion or just lack of discipline could too easily be fatal to an entire community.
What do you mean by economies of scale? I think that personal fabrication technology destroys all economics as we know them. Especially in a desolate place like Mars where government and resource monoplies would be hard to acquire.

When we have personal fabrication of the capacity that would allow what you describe it will still have to be resourced and fundamentally would also require very complicated programming to allow its existence if not just to replace itself. This is getting us into a more fluidic society yes but one dominated by Intelectual property rights. Programs that makes things from houses to kitchen knives will be licensed and electronically paid for. The program will simply be a one use item for one item made. Anarchy no, there will still be goverment if only to ensure that peoples rights and the services advanced civilisation requires.

Consider aluminum/bauxite, only found in significant quantities in like 4 countries in the whole world (it is of course found in the earth's crust in every location in the world). On earth it would be terribly difficult to make a claim on these abundant resources without pissing off those who have already set up methods to extract them, but on Mars there is simply no one there making these claims. Any any corporation that was stupid enough to do so would fall quite quickly once the threat of war was looming (and it wouldn't be the corporation making the decition to give up the resources, the workers themselves would be totally apathetic to the corporation, they could easily be convinced to let loose the resources for everyones, including theirselves, benefit).
I think the fragility of habitats would be a plus for anarchism, because anarchism respects individual soverignity, it does not respect collective corporatism. A corporation would be highly suceptable to rebellion.
Sorry, not spellchecked, I'm just rambling, didn't see this post until now.

Yes Bauxite/aluminium is common throughout the planet then again so is Iron but with our current technologies it is the concentrated resources we look for if only so we can economically mine it. On Mars as it is on Earth and likely the Moon it will be these concentrations of industrial capacity resources we are looking for.

Josh Cryer · 2006-01-03 17:18:17

When we have personal fabrication of the capacity that would allow what you describe it will still have to be resourced and fundamentally would also require very complicated programming to allow its existence if not just to replace itself.

Complicated programs, probably. I won't argue that point, but I do believe that programs, as algorithms, can be reduced to very simple constructs. But that's not important. Open Source has shown that highly complex programs can and are freely created. The RapRap Project is attempting something in this vein.

This is getting us into a more fluidic society yes but one dominated by Intellectual property rights. Programs that makes things from houses to kitchen knives will be licensed and electronically paid for. The program will simply be a one use item for one item made.

Will? I don't see why. That is one way to approach it, but which way would be more popular? In the end it would be about controlling resources. A RapRap type machine needs certain stuff to operate, so those who own and control that stuff will be the ones in charge. We need such and such minerals, we have to buy them from Abundant Minerals Co., but on Mars there would be no monopoly on resources. There would be plenty of places to get stuff. At least early on before the corporations moved in.

If people were presented with two approaches, "You can use these resources freely, just share whatever you come up with," and "These technologies are owned by this corporation and you have to pay to use it, and you can only use it so many times," I am sure that people would chose the former approach.

Anyway, the designs would not be programs per say, they'd be geometric designs, like CAD documents. The complicated stuff, chips and motherboards and things like that would of course be complicated, but reusablity would be popular. Design a multipurpose unit once, and everyone can use it for anything they want (imagine a laptop type device with everything you need from communication, to media, to GPS, etc). There would be a level of customizablity, too. Molds are a relatively simple concept, and could be custom made by you or me in a program like Blender, pushing and pulling the mold until it suits our visual desires, the primary template for the internal stuff staying the same.

Anarchy no, there will still be government if only to ensure that peoples rights and the services advanced civilization requires.

Anarchy doesn't mean a lack of government per say, people are free to have government in anarchism, the key is that they're free to do things any way they wish. I'm thinking simply of anarchistically distributed resources, with any various social organization beneath it. I personally think a governmentless society would still result, because the bureaucracy exists more because of economics, not out of necessity. We need police because we have class and poor people must be segregated from the rich, for example (to put it very simply).

On Mars as it is on Earth and likely the Moon it will be these concentrations of industrial capacity resources we are looking for.

Indeed, it's easier to acquire concentrated resources. So it would be ideal for people who are approaching anarchism to do it on Mars, because there would be very little pressure from the outside not to do things that way. On earth the political situation isn't as clear.

Grypd · 2006-01-04 05:45:30

This is getting us into a more fluidic society yes but one dominated by Intellectual property rights. Programs that makes things from houses to kitchen knives will be licensed and electronically paid for. The program will simply be a one use item for one item made.
Will? I don't see why. That is one way to approach it, but which way would be more popular? In the end it would be about controlling resources. A RapRap type machine needs certain stuff to operate, so those who own and control that stuff will be the ones in charge. We need such and such minerals, we have to buy them from Abundant Minerals Co., but on Mars there would be no monopoly on resources. There would be plenty of places to get stuff. At least early on before the corporations moved in.
If people were presented with two approaches, "You can use these resources freely, just share whatever you come up with," and "These technologies are owned by this corporation and you have to pay to use it, and you can only use it so many times," I am sure that people would chose the former approach.
Anyway, the designs would not be programs per say, they'd be geometric designs, like CAD documents. The complicated stuff, chips and motherboards and things like that would of course be complicated, but reusablity would be popular. Design a multipurpose unit once, and everyone can use it for anything they want (imagine a laptop type device with everything you need from communication, to media, to GPS, etc). There would be a level of customizablity, too. Molds are a relatively simple concept, and could be custom made by you or me in a program like Blender, pushing and pulling the mold until it suits our visual desires, the primary template for the internal stuff staying the same.

But as we have discovered human consumerism and call it keeping up with the joneses tends to make people not just buy items due to need. More often than not we will see that people will buy items for there current fashionability rather than just to replace worn items. This has lead if we look at the computer games market where each year more and more advanced items come out and though the frame and box are easily made it is the brains or chips that make the game function. These will still have to be bought especially and as they are hyper complicated will cost. I am not talking simple items like furniture but the more complicated items like electronics will always be advancing fast. This advancement is what is getting us to this situation as we speek.

Advanced electronics need extremely specialised conditions to be able to be manufactured. It is highly unlikely that this will ever be able to be designed to be made by what will in short be 3D printers without really complicated Nano tech devices.

Another point with manufacturing so easy by machine then what about the traditional crafts. It is likely that they would then gain a premium just for the moniker "Hand made".

On Mars as it is on Earth and likely the Moon it will be these concentrations of industrial capacity resources we are looking for.
Indeed, it's easier to acquire concentrated resources. So it would be ideal for people who are approaching anarchism to do it on Mars, because there would be very little pressure from the outside not to do things that way. On earth the political situation isn't as clear.

Will it be easier I only hope so but then again until we touch down and actually look this is not a guarantee.

Rxke · 2006-01-04 13:50:35

Advanced electronics need extremely specialised conditions to be able to be manufactured. It is highly unlikely that this will ever be able to be designed to be made by what will in short be 3D printers without really complicated Nano tech devices..

Those devices are almost there.

Grypd · 2006-01-04 17:31:48

Advanced electronics need extremely specialised conditions to be able to be manufactured. It is highly unlikely that this will ever be able to be designed to be made by what will in short be 3D printers without really complicated Nano tech devices..
Those devices are almost there.

3D printers are almost already here, I agree but the problem is that though making designed components from the equivalent of Flat pac furniture to a mechanical piston is easy for 3D printer to create. Advanced components like the IC chips though are not easy to make and reguire guite complicated enviroments and processes to actually function.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-07-22 15:50:45

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#2 2004-07-22 16:02:36

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#3 2004-07-22 16:06:37

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#4 2004-07-22 17:41:50

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#5 2004-07-22 19:15:36

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#6 2004-07-23 02:48:51

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#7 2004-07-23 09:08:26

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#8 2004-07-23 09:48:15

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#9 2004-07-23 10:28:18

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#10 2004-07-23 11:11:44

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#11 2004-08-04 12:35:06

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#12 2005-10-10 06:09:40

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#13 2005-10-21 18:59:04

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#14 2005-11-08 13:36:44

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#15 2005-11-09 02:29:19

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#16 2005-11-09 12:15:50

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#17 2005-11-09 13:17:03

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#18 2005-11-09 14:50:01

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#19 2006-01-02 09:07:06

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#20 2006-01-02 14:22:47

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#21 2006-01-02 16:42:01

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#22 2006-01-03 17:18:17

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#23 2006-01-04 05:45:30

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#24 2006-01-04 13:50:35

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

#25 2006-01-04 17:31:48

Re: Anarchism - Anything goes

Board footer