Re: Santorum introduces more rent collection opps


"Quirk" <quirk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1114606758.897440.212400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Mark Monson wrote:
>
>> > And ought to prove to you that the State is the Aparatus of the
> elite
>> > and exists to pretect their privilege.
>
>> When you say, "the State" do you mean a particular state, a
> particular kind > of state, or every possible state?
>
> When I say State, I mean specificly an involuntary form of monolithic,
> top-down governance, that protects the property rights of the elite.

Then you should have no problem with a constitutional
representative republic or a constitutional representative
democracy.

> Being a computer programmer I like the Client/Server vs. Peer to Peer
> analogy.

Peer to Peer is a total mess and a bitch to maintain. The problem
is that all the, so called, peers are programmers who would get
electrocuted if they ever tried to do anything serious with the
infrastructure. Being a systems analyst, electronics technician,
hardware analyst, network/systems architect, software developer
(Motif C C++ assembly and lots of scripting stuff including
OO Perl, I tend to know quite bit about all of it and not a lot
about any particular thing. They all seem to think that the
net and all the hardware just works by magic and that security
is an excuse for power mongering. Yet when they spill coffee
all over their desktop or notebook they sure want their data
back from the fried local disk.

> Marxist-Leninist, Liberals and Capitalists want a Client/Server type
> state, involuntary and with centralized authority. Anarchists want a
> peer to peer social order, an interactive network of syndicates and
> communes that all are free to join or leave, and all share equally in
> the collective Rents and Interests earned by the commune, yet each
> privately retains their Wages.

This is very much like the ideal of communism it seems to me.

>> The concept of "state" can in my mind be reduced no further than
> authority > over land.
>
> However the State also controls it Citizenship, by way of Immigration
> laws, appropriation of production by forced taxation, tariffs,

All of this is administration of land and infrastructure.

> enforcement of laws against consensual conduct etc.

And this is simply Republicanism. That ole time
fight against EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVILLLLLLL.

>It goes far beyond
> authority over land. It certainly does not serve to //mutualize// land,
> but rather serves to protect private property rights to land.

Current taxation techniques and land ownership stuff are pretty
bad. But that is not an integral part of representative democracy.

> The State, by definition in Anarchism, is the apparatus of the elite.

And Anarchism by definition of most of the people in this world
is feudalism.

> This does not mean that one could envision a imaginary "Just" State, it
> means that the real State is not just, and can not be made just because
> in the Capitalist mode of production the price of Labour is reduced to
> its cost (Subsistence) and thus the wage slave has no basis for the
> accumulation of wealth needed to influence the State.

That can be solved by redistribution of land rent.

> Therefore while a just state is not impossible, the creation of just
> state is an economic impossibility.

I think not. The USA started out as a just state. But the erosion
of state rights and the aristocratic tendencies of the congress
killed it.

http://GreateVoice.org/econ/Hijacked.php

> Also, any form of top-down rule is vulnerable to capture, thus even if
> it is in the service of justice, it can be captured and turned.

True enough. "the cost of freedom is eternal vigilance"

> In a peer to peer model, breakdowns are more easily contained, the
> other nodes can collectively cause the network to self-heal, through
> the isolation of damaged nodes.

There's that "can" thing. I wonder what the motive would be.

>> Thus the only possible society without a state is one where no
> person or > group of persons claims authority over land.

How about a situation in which we ALL claim authority over
land and elect a "state" to do our bidding?

> That is more or less the proposal of certain Individualist Anarchist
> (like Tucker), but mainstream Anarchist models, including my own
> developing Venture Communist model, place authority of the land in
> distributed worker/resident owned syndicates and communes.
>
> Regards.
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Santorum introduces more rent collection opps
    ... >> Being a computer programmer I like the Client/Server vs. Peer to ... Anarchism is non-State communism, they share the ideal of class less ... administration of land and infrastructure for the benefit of the ... > That can be solved by redistribution of land rent. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Santorum introduces more rent collection opps
    ... that protects the property rights of the elite. ... Being a computer programmer I like the Client/Server vs. Peer to Peer ... but rather serves to protect private property rights to land. ... distributed worker/resident owned syndicates and communes. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Santorum introduces more rent collection opps
    ... > elite. ... >> Peer to Peer is a total mess and a bitch to maintain. ... > mutual wealth, not private privilege. ... >> All of this is administration of land and infrastructure. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Please pray for dear convicted and stricken neighbor Panama Floyd.
    ... land. ... The towns, contractors, and allocations are all compatible and ... Try not to peer the skulls fatally, ...
    (sci.crypt)