Thursday, April 05, 2012

Rules of the game

I get together on an irregular basis to play cards with some of my relatives. Some of us (not me, of course) have trouble remembering the rules of Polish Poker and this brings many opportunities for hilarity.

Which makes me think about rules.

The common erroneous notion is that anarchists such as myself are opposed to rules in general. That's just silly. I am opposed to Rulers and arbitrary rules.

It is as if, during the course of a card game, someone keeps switching out the cards we are using for cards of some other type. Old Maid cards, perhaps. And keeps changing the rules in such a way that they benefit- win- at everyone else's expense. In other words, they rig the game.

Only a fool would keep playing under such conditions. But, just keep on voting and begging for your liberty if that's what you think is best.



  1. I completely agree with your basic position here, Kent, except that I don't consider voting to be begging. I also don't consider it effective, but it costs nealy nothing, and if I can apply any pressure, however slight, toward the direction of liberty/anarchy, isn't any improvement better than none?
    I don't have to believe their schtick to pull the lever...

  2. Voting is an act of consent to be ruled by others. If you truly value individual liberty, why would you consent to such an arrangement?

  3. I know a lot of libertarians who say that voting is an act of self defense. Maybe. I just haven't seen any evidence it works. Kinda like tossing cotton balls at a charging elephant. But if it makes you feel better I'm not going to criticize you for it. I just hope you'll also be trying something more effective.

    I used to try to vote for more liberty, too.

  4. Being an Anarchist is a little difficult. The word itself has been branded an evil thing. People just think what they are told now a days. People hear Anarchist they associate it with Terroist. I think the voting system is corrupt and almost useless at this point. I voted in the 2008 election overseas and my votes were not even counted...but I think it still has a purpose. We have to use the system to it's fullest, even if there is a chance of corruption. Look at New Hampshire, it's practically a libertarian heaven, because the voters have united.

  5. I don't find being an anarchist difficult at all. I would find it very difficult to be otherwise. Other people's misconceptions are not really my problem. I can call myself a libertarian, voluntaryist, sovereign individual, or any number of things that amount to the same thing.

    When you admit that your vote wasn't even counted in 2008 I wonder what level of corruption you would accept before finally withdrawing consent. Because I think the level of corruption is pretty near 100% at this point. The candidates you are allowed to choose between come down to insane, raging socialist candidates A or B. And even when there is an actually less-bad candidate, he can't win because people have been told that voting for him is wasting their vote. So they don't vote for him. Inconvenient votes are not counted. Sometimes entire localities have their votes "lost" or forgotten. Plus, to be allowed to even run, you have to pass through the FEC gauntlet which weeds out anyone who would actually make a positive difference.

    Liberty is not subject to a vote. Pretending it is won't get us anywhere. Liberty has been voted away- or at least criminalized. That's why I am also an outlaw. I am "above the law" and so are you. Yet I won't rob my neighbor, nor will I attack him. Not even through voting to force my will- through the guns of The State- on him. That he doesn't return the favor is sad, but expected. It will be this way until people understand that a billion people have no more right to violate the rights of one lone individual, not even by a "unanimous minus one" vote, than that lone individual has of unilaterally deciding to violate the rights of all the rest of them. Voting and pretending that any results are legitimate will hide this truth.

    If New Hampshire is so libertarian, why do all those activists (such as Pete Eyre and "Ademo") keep ending up in jail? Maybe it is better in terms of liberty is some areas, but it has actually gotten worse in others since the FSP began. I will keep watching to see what happens there.

    However, none of this depresses me. It just shows me what I will not spend my time and energy on so that I can focus on other things.

  6. You are the first person I've ever heard talk about the FSP. I was thinking of retiring in New Hampshire, until I realized I like the Northwest a lot more.

    You bring up some good points. It's just hard to give up on the hope that a democratic system could work in some way. What alternative is there besides dictatorship...but then again we may already be in a dictatorship with "Voting" as a mask to reality.

  7. I was a member of the Free State Project- signed on in about 2001 or 2002- but I opted out of all the eastern states. Spent some time in the northeast and knew it couldn't be "home". If it weren't for family, I would be a lot more likely to join the Free Wyoming Project. But, if you can't be free while surrounded by statists, you'd probably find some excuse to not be free even in Libertopia.