What Kind of a World Do You Want?
Charting out our options:
1 Like
Yes, I think this is an excellent overview of the situation.
For myself, I would immediately eliminate the two groups
“government” and “market anarchy”, except in some cases
where they might overlap with the two middle groups.
I think that “Distributed Phylarchy” would work only as
a subset of “Enarchy”. So, in that sense I would eliminate
all of the “Market Anarchy” group.
Within the “Enarchy” group there might exist some groups
that have the characteristics of the “Government” and “Market
Anarchy” groups, but these two categories should not be
imposed on the state as a whole.
My preference is definitely “Enarchy”, under the “internally
self-governing” and “city states” categories.
However, knowing the state of the rest of the world,
I do believe that some over-arching body would be
necessary to do two things: represent our Enarchy
to the rest of the world, and guarantee the rights of
the internally self-governing bodies – that is to say,
that the “state” would guarantee that no one of these
internally self-governing bodies would be allowed to
transgress on the others, or aggress upon them.
In the case of New Hampshire as a whole, the
non-aggression principle would always apply. The
protection from aggression would apply to all of those
who are unwilling victims of violence. Child abuse,
spousal abuse, elderly abuse, any type of aggressive
assault would be included. Serious neglect would be
included, if that neglect results in a continuing deterioration
of the condition of the victim that could lead to permanent
disability or death. The state should have nothing to say
about criminal matters. It could, however, step in if one
of the polities should ask for an investigation of abuse that
is taking place in another polity.
No assumption of abuse, nor assumption of “intent”,
should be grounds for intervention. This would come
into play mostly in the field of sexual relationships.
The whole concept of statutory rape is one I will never
understand. Rape, or sexual assault as it is more
often cited in the criminal codes, is definitely a violent
act. But I think our whole society has been propagandized
to believe that any small thing that someone doesn’t
like should be taken as aggression.
This should not be taken to mean that an individual polity
would be restricted in any way, only that the state would
have no power to intervene unless there was severe abuse.
1 Like
Can NH catch up to Estonia and Switzerland after we escape the US?
1 Like
“What happens when countries get smaller and break off? The empirical evidence shows that as states get smaller, as they break off from other states, those small states compete, and as they face the threat of further secession, they’re actually more open to trade, to the migration of workers, and to economic development.” —
@ryanmcmaken
at #LibertyCon24
https://twitter.com/sfliberty/status/1754163932644757883
1 Like
Compare the list of the top 10 or so in the Human Freedom Index (2024) with the top
10 or so on the Freedom on the Net (2023) list.
Human Freedom Index Freedom on the Net
Switzerland…Iceland
New Zealand…Estonia
Denmark…Canada
Ireland…Costa Rica
Sweden…United Kingdom
Estonia…Taiwan
Iceland…Germany
Luxembourg…Japan
Finland…Australia
Norway…France
1 Like
“There are two basic methods a state can use to resist federal tyranny: interposition or nullification and secession.”
Biotech Boom
The Manchester Millyard is becoming a global hotspot for making human tissue and organs
“We should build societies that work with human nature, not against it.”
That exactly matches what I have been saying right along, in different
words.
Human nature is that some people are going to do drugs, for
whatever reason.
Human nature says that when things get too tough for you, you might
scream and run around in circles, or you might kill someone.
Human nature is not the same for every person… we’re humans,
but not exactly the same as every other human in every little detail.
Human nature desires sex, but with whom and when and how
can be very different (sexual incompatibility).
We can be human, and still have what others would call defects.
No one is perfect, by any scale. This applies to our physical selves,
our religious/philosophical selves, our emotional selves, our
intellectual selves.
While our 150 might overlap with other groups of 150, it is very
unlikely that in a group of 150 people, that is the same group
of 150 humans that each and every human in the group has as
their 150. Almost all of us will have some of our 150 that no one
else in the specified group will have.
1 Like