A very big blockage people have when envisioning a anarchist society is that it is basically instinctive to project root problems and symptoms we have now with government onto a stateless society.
To those who has had limited exposure to what anarchy means to anarchrists or what a society like that could look like I will recommend these two videos.
"How a voluntaryist society would function"
"What anarchy isn't"
It is the same thing with the people in the Victorian era seeing the distant future having hot air balloons for traveling., Or people thinking at one time that steam boats would have railroad wheels on them so they can go on land and sea.
When it was argued that cotton picking had to be done by slaves they didn't know the equipment that would exist later on.
Basically visualizing the future is very dependant on what you know now.
So we can see it is hard to find to grasp that governments might be a cause of many problems that government can be seen to fix.
"government interference in the economy makes more problems which require more interference to fix" I can't remember who said this.
I often see statists claim that anarchists think that humans are a solitary being and not a social being with a interdependent nature.
The anarchists believe the exact opposite of that.
The statists actually beleive that humans are naturally solitary beings while anarchists know that humans are a social species.
With human beings being a social species, peace and helping each other out would happen more than statists who think that humans are a solitary being can imagine.
The "Humans being a social species so anarchists are stupid" argument is very self defeating. If human beings are a social species you do not need a authority to practice altruism for humanity.
It is often stated that the economics of public goods will work against the people without taxes, so we need taxation. Some examples are roads, defense, and fire protection.
The argument goes like this, If there is a freely accessible good people will decide to keep their money and use the good for maximum benefit in the hopes that other contributers pay for the good, since there is no compulsory payment, too many people decide to free ride and not become contributers. It appears that the free market has failed.
I do think there are 3 things that discredit the public goods require a state argument.
If there are a large amount of capable contributers and a public good that requires only a little amount of funding, or doesnt require a very large budget, the public good is statistically more likely to be fully funded, even if humans are naturally more selfish than altruistic.
When humans give money to a charitable cause they receive a "warm feeling", many psycological studies prove this.
There are ways for non-profits to get money almost for free. Goodwill for example partially uses it's profits to go to charity.many state lotteries and liquor stores in America do this to raise money
On police protection in a anarchist society I'll link this
"Something you need to know about cops by highimpactflix"
I will talk in detail about national defense in a anarchist society,
Another blockage in envisioning the future as well as the past and present is to see state armies as some xmen with near omnipotent superpowers that most of the time can only be defeated by another state army, another blockage is people seeing the world as some risk board game map, where armies can move from one country to another without much concern for international opinion and supplies.
This video really makes my point
"The incomprehensibly big lie by Larken Rose"
when a anarchist society is talked about people will say "people can own tanks in ancapistan that would be crazy!" There is a very different way military equipment would be obtained, there are tinfoilhatters (no insult intended) that go out of there way to get tanks today with how expensive they are, in a anarchist society people would pool their resources together and get tanks, anti tank weapons and anti aircraft weapons easily (And they wouldn't be misused Because they agreed to put it in a stockpile or something like that).
Some people will definitely think when reading this "won't the people in ancapistan try to avoid fighting or just not do it?"."
I say no.
I remember this one story of these really big river rats infesting this town and they did start to attack people. The people in the town DID volunteer their time to hunt the river rats and protect people from them, I would say something similar would happen to in a invasion
I also hear statists saying that people would refuse to fight for areas of a anarchist society far away from their home, so therefore the defense would fail. I would give two examples as to why the opposite would happen. When the war with isis in Iraq happened, many people from across the world went to fight isis, the same thing happened with the Spanish civil war, people from across the world wanted to fight Franco,
I am sorry this article was so long, I had many points to touch upon, but anyway thanks for reading
Congratulations @ironman321! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP