Who benefits from all the important things happening in the…

Meanwhile... lots of people are busy throwing shit at Bill Gates, fighting vaccines, politicising public health and watching youtubers' fantasies about conspiracies. So, that is your concern? Bill Gates? Wake up people.

All noise?

Symptoms of human misery.

Who is benefitting?

I tend not to believe government propaganda and often prefer a good conspiracy theory over a fishy official story full of holes.

Wake me up.

If you have to "believe", it means you don't know. So just tell yourself the truth. Helping to create a cult around a conspiracy theory is not good if you don't know if it is true. Do you care about the truth?

Is this an attempt at answering my question?

I know nothing with certainly.
You 9n the other hand seem to think you have knowledge that can wake people up...

So who is benefitting?
Do you know?
Wake.
Me.
Up.

Besides being skeptical about official and unofficial narratives I'm also an anarchist, which to me means that nobody has the privilege to violate other people's individual rights. To you, anarchists are extremely naive, right?

Another wake up chance.

Looking forward to a healthy exchange that brings us closer to the truth.

stronk opinions both

That wasn't an attempt to answer your question. I was making the point of separating believing from knowing.
I believe (not know), who benefit from such trends seek top-down systems of government. If it is a country, Russia, China, if a group, mobsters.

Now that we agree that we don't know,
I can't help but wonder why exactly you feel so comfortable to dismiss unofficial narratives outright...

Take 9/11. Was there a conspiracy?
Sure. Question is just by who.

The government claiming things means nothing.

I do think anarchists are naive because their ideals are too separate from reality, they are pure thinkers who ignore human nature. How do anarchists deal with stealing, murder, slavery, etc?

Anarchism doesn't mean 'no rules'
It means 'no rulers'. A ruler is someone who claims the privilege to initiate violence.

Why do you think that to deal with violation of rights you need a ruler?

The state is the experiment.
Order doesn't depend on it...

I am not dismissing any narrative. I am dismissing people assuming they know something based on told story and engaging on activities based on that "knowledge". Official narratives on controversial issues are as credible as unofficial ones - not credible.

Ok. Another thing we can agree on.

I'd prefer decentralized, transparent organizations dealing with the violation of rights, security etc.

Why? Because they would be subject to the same rules as anyone else and be accountable for their actions.

Meanwhile democide:
260 million victims...

The western democratic state is there because the majority of the people want it to be there. It is not a ruler, it is a delegated authority.
So, in the ideal anarchist land, what happens if someone kills your dad?

How can you delegate something you don't have?

If you have the right to self- defense, and we do, we can delegate it without giving some shady entity the privilege to violate rights.

Are you aware that there is a large body of texts dealing with this?

Maybe reserve your judgment untill you have taken a glimpse of it...

I answered your question, would you answer mine?

I believe I have, which part is unclear?

Meanwhile I still don't even know why you think you need an entity that is above the rules to enforce the rules, or how we can delegate rights (privileges, to be more precise) we don't even have

Maybe the problem lies here, let me clarify:

I don't think we can just get rid of the state and expect order. There would be chaos.

What we can do, step by step, is to break the monopoly of the state and create decentralized solutions.

"So, in the ideal anarchist land, what happens if someone kills your dad?"
This is the unanswered question.

As I said, you don't need tyranny to have order...

Transparent, competing organizations without special privileges would ensure securety, justice etc, just like it was for the greatest part of human history.

Self organized people can deal with predators.

Why do you need special privileges (privilege to steal etc.) To enforce rules?

The right to self- defense can be delegated.
The privilege to violate rights can't.

What magic is necessary to enforce rules?

Those are not acts. How would you actually deal with it? Would hire hire a mob to hit back? Would you do it yourself? Would you let it go? Or what?

There would be organizations specialized in doing it.

Different ones would gather evidence, evaluate it, present it, act on it.

Imagine the state, but with competition, transparent, without special rights.

Where are privileges necessary exactly?

Imagine being stranded with 10 others.
Violence is initiated

Why would you give one guy special privileges to take others stuff and tell them what they can or can't do with their lives just to deal with the problem?

It's completely unnecessary, isn't it?

If you are interested in freedom you should absolutely take advantage of the resources available. Molyneux books 'everyday anarchy' and 'practical anarchy' will give you a much more detailed vision of a free society.

I still don't understand what would make a state the only way of dealing with crime.

Conflicts have been resolved without it all through the ages.

What magic has the state that nonviolent organizations lack?

And you know what's the best part?

Nobody would force you to live under a certain system. You could have a state together with like-minded people, elect a leader telling you how to live etc.

You just couldn't force others to finance it.

Anarchism does take human nature into account. Exactly BECAUSE OF human nature anarchists insist that NOBODY gets to be above the rules, gets to have the privilege to violate rights of others, which is the m.o. of the state apparatus with all it implies.

You still haven't answered my question. Maybe it is too realistic.

I have done for you what I could, talked about the necessary organizations, trying to find out what magic only a violent entity has - without success - pointing you to resources that go into the details you can't imagine on your own...

The books are free.

There is nothing good and necessary in this world that can only be financed and organized through theft and coercion.

I seriously don't understand where this idea comes from and what the reasoning is.

Maybe this can be a first step to overcome this barrier:

https://freemansperspective.com/justice-without-state/

/trolltoll @243
/poll [in an ideal land,people don't kill ]

I trust that you understand that the most detailed step by step manual on what to do in case of murder absent a state could be only my imagination, right?

What I tried to show is that there is no reason to believe only a state can do those things.

And since you don't seem to find a reason either for justice being exclusively possible via en entity that claims the privilege to violate individual rights, maybe there's something to it...

I asked a simple question, you dodged it.

So how would we harvest cotton without slavery?

With machines.

What machines?

Harvesting machines... what is it you don't understand?

Can you discribe how exactly they would work?

No. Is there a reason machines can't do it?

Dodged question.

Sigh.

It is a very simple question. You are trying very hard not to answer it.

Alright.
Thanks for waking me up...