Hah... I've heard "Spoonerism" before but never stopped to see what it means.
And yes... Lysander Spooner is an interesting guy. He liked to throw a wrench into the workings of authority.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Hah... I've heard "Spoonerism" before but never stopped to see what it means.
And yes... Lysander Spooner is an interesting guy. He liked to throw a wrench into the workings of authority.
Yeh have reblogged so i can peruse at my leisure, I didn't realise libertarian was a euphemism for anarchist? I'd class myself as an anarchist bottom line.
Nah... Libertarians are CLOSE to anarchism. Libertarians want to minimize the amount of laws to an absolute minimum. At least some of them. Like any party there are factions.
Technically I am still a Libertarian. I tend to call myself a Minarchist or a Voluntaryist.
I think there need to be a minimum set of rules. For example I do not consider the Non-Aggression Principle to be optional. Thus, that would be a rule.
Anarchy requires that there are no rulers and by extension no rules.
I think there need to be some rules but I suspect we could get them to such a low number that pretty much anyone would know what they are and understand them. Lawyers would hate that.
Now the Libertarian party usually referred to themselves as "Fiscally conservative, and socially liberal" and by those labels they are not referring to the bastardized versions of the words liberal and conservative of today.
During Lysander's time things were quite different.
Anarchy is not about no rules at all. The common law always stands, 'rulers' or 'governemnt' are just administrators. They are managers of the economy and their written rules are not laws. There are only 3 valid laws and they are common law/natural law. Everything else is rules of society. Yeh I guess conservatives are closer to libertarian except in uk the cons are now just as leftist as labour and both are pretty much fascist.
As far as I know it Anarchy is derived from An Archos which means "No Rulers".
It doesn't define any rules. Common law, common justice, natural law, natural justice, etc... I think you'll find it ends up being interpreted VERY subjectively.
Natural Law and things like that still fit within what I myself call Minarchist. Minimal set of rules. :)
Yet that is my subjective interpretation.
Anarchy is the rejection of governmental authority and societal hierarchy. Nothing to do with lawlessness.
But- It also has become a synonym for chaos and disorder. Probably propaganda.
Yep. I didn't say lawlessness. I simply stated the etymology of the word and where it comes from and what it means.
It literally means "No Rulers".
Everything beyond that is subjective interpretation.
It doesn't mean chaos, though that is how the media loves to present it.
Many people think of Road Warrior/Mad Max type settings when they think of Anarchy because that is what they have been conditioned to think.
Exactly, conditioning.