New Hampshire Underground

New Hampshire Underground => Voluntaryism/Anarchism => Topic started by: dalebert on August 07, 2008, 11:00 PM NHFT

Title: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: dalebert on August 07, 2008, 11:00 PM NHFT
About time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFP4Qu24f80
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: K. Darien Freeheart on August 07, 2008, 11:43 PM NHFT
Is there a reason I should know about this person?
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: Pat K on August 08, 2008, 12:32 AM NHFT
Maybe they should have stopped at 11999.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: Mike Barskey on August 08, 2008, 12:43 AM NHFT
I have not watched many of Luk12000's vids (http://uk.youtube.com/user/Luke12000), but this one alone (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fnTRzvxgbHM) might be a reason you should know about this person.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: dalebert on August 08, 2008, 08:33 AM NHFT
He's reaching ppl. I've never seen an anarchist blogger achieve so many subscribers so quickly. Maybe it's just because he's really cute, but for whatever reason, he's talking about anarchy reasonably intelligently IMO and a lot of people are paying attention. For that, I give him kudos.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: memenode on August 08, 2008, 02:46 PM NHFT
Wow, he reached me alright. That guy is gold. He is marketable, probably, as Dalebert says, because he's "cute", but I think there's more to it. He seems to be willing to circumvent all of the totally irrelevant bulls*it that people get stuck on which makes them miss a more fundamental point and fail to make any real progress. And I think that clears a way for a very powerful idea.

This seems evident from both the video in the OP and one Mike linked to. I agree that too often words have multiple definitions so it's important to define your own words before using them to describe what you want to describe. Otherwise, we're essentially speaking different languages to each other - completely missing each other's points.

I'm gonna keep my eye on this one. :)

Thanks for the reference!
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: John Edward Mercier on August 08, 2008, 04:05 PM NHFT
It stunned me that Dale's link, he listed support for representative government and anarchy at the same time. Then in Mike's link, 'Anarchism is a lack of belief in government.'

Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: dalebert on August 08, 2008, 04:36 PM NHFT
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on August 08, 2008, 04:05 PM NHFT
It stunned me that Dale's link, he listed support for representative government and anarchy at the same time. Then in Mike's link, 'Anarchism is a lack of belief in government.'

Luke believes in voluntary government which would truly be representative. He doesn't believe in monopoly government, the only kind most people have ever heard of. This is exactly what he's talking about in this video- obsessing over words and their various definitions just for the sake of arguing rather than have a meaningful discussion.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: John Edward Mercier on August 08, 2008, 05:07 PM NHFT
Voluntary government makes more sense...
Its hard without further direct discussion. I equate 'representative' with someone representing me or a group, but in a voluntary government I would represent myself. But then again I equate voluntaryism with more a complex arrangement of consensual contracts rather than a government.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: dalebert on August 08, 2008, 08:39 PM NHFT
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on August 08, 2008, 05:07 PM NHFT
Voluntary government makes more sense...
Its hard without further direct discussion. I equate 'representative' with someone representing me or a group, but in a voluntary government I would represent myself. But then again I equate voluntaryism with more a complex arrangement of consensual contracts rather than a government.

Well, the word government is a bit loaded. There are endless arguments of semantics about whether such organizations would still be called government or are just services. I think what he means by it being representative of you is because you have explicitly chosen them, have signed some terms, and are voluntarily paying for their services, they can legitimately back the claim that they represent you.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: memenode on August 09, 2008, 08:56 AM NHFT
Yeah, the trouble is there is no government which is not coercive so we lack any sort of real world reference of such thing as a voluntary government.

So I wouldn't really use the term "government" to describe an alternative which I stand for when advocating the liberty mindset to people, but then again when speaking with someone who already understood what is meant by voluntary representative government there's no problem. That's established by agreeing on a common premise and definitions of words before using them to advocate a point.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: John Edward Mercier on August 09, 2008, 03:15 PM NHFT
Agreed. One of the problems that I see during contract disputes is what the contract actually states.
So the term 'government', in the sense that it has power to rule is maybe inappropriate.

I tend to think of associations in this sense. They have by-laws and sometimes limits on membership, but not coerced entry... nor impossible exit.
In the US, entry into the Social Security system is considered voluntary... but parents acting in a custodial manner tend to enter children. And when the children later want out... there doesn't seem to be a means to dissassociate, so its not truly voluntary.

Representative was harder for me to determine as it has two formats... agent (someone you choose to represent you) and custodial (someone that is chosen to represent you). Luke12000 is using the first.

Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: J’raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 12:34 AM NHFT
Quote from: dalebert on August 08, 2008, 08:39 PM NHFT
... [T]he word government is a bit loaded. There are endless arguments of semantics about whether such organizations would still be called government or are just services.

This is why I like Menno's term authoritarian model of government. It let's people know that we believe there are different models of government, and it's the authoritarian ones that we take issue with.

I wonder if governance would be a better word to use than government. It means essentially the same thing—the way in which things are governed—but it hasn't been associated with and sullied by the concept of The Government and The State in the way that the word government has.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: BillKauffman on August 15, 2008, 03:09 AM NHFT
Governance as legitimate agency.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: John Edward Mercier on August 15, 2008, 10:22 AM NHFT
Governance is the actual framework and policy, while government is a body politic.
An example is the Non-Aggression Principle can be use as a basis of governance... but no body politic is required.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: K. Darien Freeheart on August 15, 2008, 11:48 AM NHFT
The reason I have a problem with the term government in general is that it makes a weird assumption that certain categories of "services" are ipso facto "government services".

Why, when discussing putting fire protection services into a free market someone might be inclined to say that it's moved from an "authoritarian government" to a "voluntary government". It works the EXACT same way as any other service so why should that be distinguished from say the "voluntary government" service of buying Xboxes at Target or Wal-Mart?

Government, in my mind, REQUIRES force. No force, no government. The fact that certain services are handled by governments today don't make them "government services" so switching calling them voluntary government services is kind of pointless.
Title: Re: Luke12000 is back!
Post by: John Edward Mercier on August 15, 2008, 12:04 PM NHFT
It more a mindset. At one time, no fire or police departments existed even in the largest cities. Then voluntary associations began providing this service... and people's mindset began to feel it necessary.

Its like roads... if no formal maintenance of roads occurred, believe me the world wouldn't shut down.
The structure of transport would simply change, as it has in the past.