The Root Difference Between A Voluntaryist Anarchist and An (AnythingElse)-ist

General Discussion
#1

A voluntaryist or anarchist understands that they alone are responsible for meeting their needs and/or desires.

An (AnythingElse)-ist believes that others should act in a way that meets their their needs and/or desires.

The perfect example of this truism has just played out here in the Forkfest subforum.
@Condon created a thread to ask “how to schedule such events? And where to have them?”

@AO77 responded “I think we should set up a Google doc…”

@Condon replied with “By all means do set it up, but make sure that its existence, purpose, and location are widely advertised so that anyone who wants to use it can do so, and so that everyone knows it is an agenda and schedule for the Forkfest.” Thus placing the satisfaction of his specific needs and desires into someone else’s hands.

When someone did create a Forkfest Events Calendar, his first response was not “great, thank you, I will post my events and check it for other’s events”, but rather it was again a call for others to do the work he wished to see done: “Spread the word…widely.”

Two days later, after repeatedly suggesting/telling others to promote the calendar, he was apparently unsatisfied with the results of any such promotion and suddenly we’re treated to the following:
“I wonder—and I’m just musing here—if this episode isn’t an example of the dysfunctionality (or non-functionality) of anarchism…in the sense of not having a structure designed to ensure that things get things done.”

You see, the community/society/others had not met @Condon’s needs, therefore the community/society/others are dysfunctional. And, from his (AnythingElse)-ist view, he’s absolutely right. Those damn “Youthful, uninformed and misguided” anarchists had not met his needs/desires promptly enough or to his satisfaction and therefore they had failed him.

Meanwhile the thread (and the whole Forkfest subforum) makes clear that, from the view of the anarchists & voluntaryists, the community/society/others were not only functional, but had been successful in meeting their needs/desires. Why? Because individuals stepped up to make the things happen that they desired and those that didn’t step up acknowledged that they clearly didn’t want those things bad enough to do them themselves.

(Note: my apologies for using the bulky (AnythingElse)-ist when the proper antonym for anarchist is clearly statist. I didn’t want to use statist as it has become a loaded insult to many and this post is not meant as an attack, merely an example of the title thesis.)

1 Like
#2

That Condon guy…blast him, the dirty rat! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

#3

Thanks for your profound contribution to the conversation, Tim.

#4

It could be worse… You could be living in PA.

1 Like
#5

I’m guessing you posted this reply in the wrong thread as I fail to see how it has any relevance to the topic at hand.

As an anarchist, the results of an election have no bearing on my personal responsibility to meet my own needs.

Only an (AnythingElse)-ist is really concerned over who some group of people decide best represent their interests.

#6

No… I had the right thread.

But don’t you think that type of approach will only help ensure you get worse government?

I’d rather have conservatives and libertarians, or even old school blue dog democrats than socialists and Marxists. Wouldn’t you?

Don’t you have to work? Pay taxes? Register your car? While I’d like to go hide in the woods and live off the land, that would not be practical, nor provide the best opportunities for my children.

#7

Ok. I still don’t see the connection to the philosophical stance presented in the OP, but I’m happy to have this conversation since it’s the one you want to have.

Your question assumes that there are better and worse governments. And it is on this point that I wholeheartedly disagree. All government is oppressive and therefore equally abhorrent to me.

You’re welcome to whatever government you desire as far as I’m concerned.
Just please keep it away from me and mine.

I’ve lived in areas governed by conservatives, Democrats, socialists and Marxists.
Which flavor statists were in control of the government made little difference to my life on a day-to-day basis. They all tried to enforce ridiculous rules upon me and I successfully ignored the vast majority of their edicts.

In the six years since moving to the Shire I’ve generated over a million dollars in revenue and paid less than $15,000 in taxes and fees to all levels of government combined. I couldn’t tell you the political party of a single city politician or state or federal legislator that claims to represent me, much less anything about their actual political ideologies. Yet I enjoy more freedom then I have at any other point in my life.

(Edit to add full disclosure: that $15,000 doesn’t count the tuition I paid for my daughter to attend a public college.)

No, I don’t have to work, pay taxes or register a car. I only have to do what it takes to meet my needs and the needs of those I care for. Sometimes doing those things makes meeting my needs easier, but they’ve never been a requirement.

I neither live off the land hiding in the woods nor do I have any desire to do so. I spent most of my life in the 10th largest city in the United States (San Jose, CA) and currently live in the largest city in New Hampshire (Manchester).

Once I set my mind to it, and put in the effort, I was able to provide for both my needs/desires and (as a single parent) those of my daughter, while not putting much thought into what the government was doing or who was holding any particular political office.

My daughter is now an adult out in the world succeeding on her own and she has no complaints in regards to the opportunities I was able to provide for her. In fact, several of her friends over the years have shared that she’s expressed pride in the fact that I was able to provide for her while standing by the anarchist/voluntaryist principles I instilled into her.

#8

Only hypocrites live in cities such as these and claim “Independence”.
Samm

#9

Unfortunately there aren’t any truly free cities yet but engaging in larger societies/cities can be done as a free person.

1 Like
#10

Care to explain on who I am dependent?
Or is this just another drive-by insult?

#11

if he responds, it will probably be something about “well, you use roads don’t you?”

#12

Isn’t taking a shit in a toilet and flushing it when it’s connected to municipal water & sewer system theft?

3 Likes
#13

I see it more as a donation. My feces is worth more than their sewage service. :sunglasses:

1 Like
#14

I guess if you’re one of the River Campers in manchester like Patrick was talking about you could consider yourself Idependent or at least reaching hard for it.
Otherwise your most basic needs are being met by OTHER sources than yourself: Water,Sewer,Food,Heat,Do you rent?. They’ve prety much made it “law” against Independence in manchvegas. See Patricks story "Teach a Man to Fish"
Samm

#15

Apparently the problem here is actually different definitions of the word “dependent”.
I’m using the generally accepted English definition of “requiring someone or something”.
While you seem to be defining it as “making use of someone or something”.
Would that be fair? If not, please share your definition of the word with me so we can continue the conversation with more clarity.

Under the common definition, I am not dependent on others for water, sewer, food, heat, or shelter because I am capable of providing these things for myself. The fact that I choose to engage in trade with other people for them does not make me dependent on those other people. In fact, I purchase each of these from a variety of different sources, lessening my need for any single outside resource.

Under the definition you seem to be using there could be no such things as independence, could there? All living things must consume external resources in order to survive. Even the most simple creatures depend on food sources other than themselves.

Perhaps instead of “OTHER sources” you meant “other people”. In which case all but the most primitive of people would still be incapable of independence. A truly independent man, by that definition, would be unable to use tools or materials created by others, leaving them literally in the stone age.

Does your use of a chainsaw prevent you from being independent?
Numerous other people mined the raw materials from the earth, smelted them into steel, forged that steel into the necessary shapes, assembled them into a chainsaw and transported the finished product to a location where you could acquire it. Not to mention all of the other people required to retrieve, refine and transport the gasoline that powers it (or build the solar panels and batteries required to collect and store its electricity).

Where, exactly, do you draw the line between dependence and independence?

As you so aptly put it in a previous thread: “‘law’ only exists in minds that believe in authority.” Are you now claiming it has relevance to those who don’t?

#16

Ultimately, all of us are blessed beyond our wildest dreams to be US Citizens. You may not like government and the rules it forces upon you, left or right, but we have far more free speech and liberties than any other country on the planet. Where they lock people up or worse for political dissent.

The fact that you can live in Manchester and walk to the grocery store and home school your kid and make mad money under the table is that you get to live in this land of freedom and capitalism and opportunity.

Look where Venezuela has gone in roughly 20 short years. From the strongest economy in South America to what we see going on today. The reds are knocking on the door Samm, and your child will likely not have as many opportunities as you.

Why is it that so many immigrants can come to our country and succeed where so many of those with every opportunity afforded them here as natural born citizens choose to follow the herd and ascribe to mediocrity?

Part of the Liberty movement in NH was to bring like-minded people together to make positive political change. We’re not going to change Washington DC from the top down, we need to change it from the bottom up. When enough states demand for the same things (changes), the political elite will generally swing with it. At the end of the day, they want to get re-elected.

Though our politicians and the 19 gazillion special interest groups have us so divided as American’s right now, it’s nearly impossible to not offend or alienate somebody. Liberty moves away from all that.

#17

I’m for Revolution not reform. The “USA” is a corporation. Being part of it and being ruled by a gang is nothing to be proud of. The “USA” is the antithesis of humanity. We as people are simply human beings. Shut that fucking TV off.
Samm

#18

Yah, we’re divided.
I only see 2 sides though: Those who accept enslavement: Statists (anythingelse-ists) and Those who won’t accept enslavement: Anarchists (against rulers)
The truth is like a moose in the road up north,on a rainy midnight when you’re driving too fast. It’s big and it’s there. No mistaking it. When you finally see it :WHAM! It’ll hit ya’.
Samm

#19

For the benefit of keeping The State in control by maintaining order.

Have fun trying to convince the counterfeit people that make up the political establishment that it’s in their best interest to do what you say…or else. Some people can stomach it.

2 Likes
#20

Yes, others outside the United States are less free then those of us living in the US.
Yes, others outside New Hampshire are less free than those of us living in NH.
But your post highlights the nature of the (AnythingElse)-ist focusing primarily on others, while the Anarchist is focusing primarily on self.

I’m happy to concede that an infected bullet wound is much worse than a non-infected bullet wound. But that doesn’t mean I’m willing to stand still while you shoot me as long as you also offer antibiotics.

I don’t know and, more to the point, as an anarchist I’m not overly concerned about it. I’m far more concerned about about how I (and those close to me) can succeed. And, IME, it is that focus that has allowed me to succeed.

Do you realize that this statement is just as divisive? You’re arbitrarily dividing Americans and non-Americans. People are just people and the Voluntary Anarchist has already internalized that any further division is not particularly beneficial.