Creating a Free Alter-Market

[memenode]

I am increasingly of opinion that in order to get rid of the parasite that is the government we might need to create a whole alter-economy, one that is completely independent of government, even if that makes it essentially "underground". This international, borderless and government-less market will be populated by businesses which do not pay taxes, trade ONLY in real value such as gold and silver and serve an ever increasing number of people all around the world - by each new customer essentially slowly but surely wiping the infected market and replacing it by itself.

A side consequence of developing such a market is the decrease of government powers all over the world in favor of the power of our own independent market, as we are getting more wealth, more influence and more pull on minds of the masses (getting leverage needed in order to get them to consider our idea and voluntarily withdraw support) to increasingly undermine government, rid it of its life-support.

There are, however, risks associated with this plan.. Governments are still carrying the stick and we can't *always* escape it. How can we organize so strongly so as to make ourselves less vulnerable from attacks by the parasite we're trying to scratch off our backs? I guess that can be part of the discussion in this topic, in addition to the remarks anyone may have about this idea. (Btw, this is probably not an unique idea and might have already been suggested somewhere, if so please let me know).

You know, this actually stems from the idea that we should live free regardless of it being forbidden. Who is to say that we should not just *take* our freedom no matter what someone wrote in some notebook that they branded a "lawbook". We should just take our freedom, join up in a tight network and create the roots of the Market 2.0, a Free Market done right.

Thank you.

[Vitruvian]

My friend, the word is agorism.

[memenode]

I see, thank you for pointing it out. It does seem to fit the general idea. I'm gonna read up more on that site.

In any case, that's really what I feel should be pushed up. I have little faith in political action doing anything more than just "milding the climate" a bit, so to speak. We can't get rid of government by including ourselves in it. Agorism seems like what you get when you combine the full extents of both market activism and civil disobedience, exercising both at the same time rather than separately.

It does seem like a rational idea to even develop defense agencies before the government police is phased out, as means of defense, a way to balance the defensive power of an alter-market with the offensive power of government.

Cheers

[jaqeboy]

...we might need to create a whole alter-economy, one that is completely independent of government, even if that makes it essentially "underground"....slowly but surely wiping the infected market and replacing it by itself.

...(Btw, this is probably not an unique idea and might have already been suggested somewhere, if so please let me know).

Ideas discussed in the 70's finally published in book form as New Libertarian Manifesto, by Samuel Edward Konkin III, first printing 1979.

=======> 

I guarantee that after you read this short booklet, you'll be saying "Yeah... what he said."

Let us know what you think of it.

[jaqeboy]

The little black book of the libertarian movement from Chairman Sam... only he would insist "NO CHAIRMEN", just FREE men!

[John Edward Mercier]

Police enforce the law... not defend or protect you. Very seldom will an officer stop a violent crime as compared to investigate one after the fact. Learn self-defense.

Free Market Capitalism does not involve the trading of gold or silver. It relies on the open understanding of the parties involved. Meaning they exchange what they have, for what they want.

[ancapagency]

I am increasingly of opinion that in order to get rid of the parasite that is the government we might need to create a whole alter-economy, one that is completely independent of government, even if that makes it essentially "underground".

Already on it.

[David]

These things can't be 'created', they have to be developed.  It is already happening.  Slowly. 

[memenode]

Free Market Capitalism does not involve the trading of gold or silver. It relies on the open understanding of the parties involved. Meaning they exchange what they have, for what they want.

Sure, I agree. There's really no particular principle about which means of exchange would be used, whatever two people agree to use. I just assumed considering that it may be most convenient at this point that our underground free market would use silver and gold because there already is some infrastructure for it.. like Liberty Dollar or Shire Silver in NH and (if anyone can dare risk it) all these internet based services.

Already on it.

Great! Ancap Agency is a great start. Hopefully some of its services will have an international reach soon as well (if not already).

These things can't be 'created', they have to be developed.  It is already happening.  Slowly.

I agree. I suppose it may be inevitable for this market to be merely transitional at first, before it can become completely independent from the current system. Some ancap companies may at first trade in both fiat currencies like a dollar and silver/gold and whatever else people find eligible. Some might even pay taxes at first just in order to develop themselves into strong enough players to survive should government come knocking. But the end goal is an efficient, networked and secured free market created by ancap businesses to serve everyone who wish to be served by them and steal away from the government-corrupted market of today, essentially eating away on the pie that government depends on to survive.

[srqrebel]

Gu3st, I completely agree with your approach. Thank you for articulating it so well! Your initial post in this thread actually helped bring things into sharper perspective for me regarding the way out of this mess. While I was long aware of the need for exactly what you are describing, it had never occurred to me to emphasize it quite the way you have. In fact, the Free Staters who have already relocated to NH are starting to do just that on a tiny scale, and it just seemed to me the instinctive thing to do -- but articulating it the way you did actually brings into sharp focus this very important and major piece of the solution. Good job!

In addition to the underground economy as the economic matrix of the coming free market-based civilization, there also needs to be a push toward state-of-the-art security measures for those who participate in the underground economy. Ultimately, the acid test of any such security measures is the ability to protect the customer from the most vicious and powerful criminals of all: The agents of the United States Federal Government.

To be consistent with the laws of human nature (specifically the inherent self-ownership and self-dominion of each individual), the emphasis of such security measures should be increasingly in the direction of crime deterrence, while consistently moving away from invasive follow-up measures, and deterrence measures that inflict permanent harm.

The point of the underground economy is to consistently move in the direction of a decentralized economy regulated only by the Invisible Hand of voluntary, informed business transactions. The point of state-of-the-art crime deterrence is to consistently move in the direction of a civilization where crime simply does not pay -- yet those foolish enough to attempt it anyway, will simply be decisively foiled, rather than suffering permanent harm.

[srqrebel]

These things can't be 'created', they have to be developed.  It is already happening.  Slowly. 

Could you please explain the distinction between "creating" and "developing"?

[K. Darien Freeheart]

Could you please explain the distinction between "creating" and "developing"?

I think the general idea is that, for the same reasons the government can't eliminate (only interfere with) the free market, a truly free market can't spontaneously be put into place in a meaningful way.

The market can be seen as the sum of a collection of individual transactions that can only exist because of individual needs and the differences in value.

The created vs developed thing means that to build a sustainable, adaptive market it needs to happen and "grow" rather than planning it out and one days saying "Go!".

[K. Darien Freeheart]

Thank you for articulating it so well! Your initial post in this thread actually helped bring things into sharper perspective for me regarding the way out of this mess. While I was long aware of the need for exactly what you are describing, it had never occurred to me to emphasize it quite the way you have. In fact, the Free Staters who have already relocated to NH are starting to do just that on a tiny scale, and it just seemed to me the instinctive thing to do -- but articulating it the way you did actually brings into sharp focus this very important and major piece of the solution. Good job! Smiley

I have to agree! For me, this essentially sums up what I've considered "market activism" but in retrospect, it seems a bit more than that. Agorism, if that's the terms one chooses to run with, is a bit civil-disobedience, a bit market activism and a bit self-sufficiency.

The reasons it seems so natural, IMO, is because it is. The free market is, in my opinion, the "default". It takes a tremendous amount of effort to actually cripple the free market but takes no effort to start one. Living as if you're already free will establish a free market.

[memenode]

but articulating it the way you did actually brings into sharp focus this very important and major piece of the solution. Good job! 

Thank you. Best ideas come naturally, which is why it also doesn't surprise others thought of it before too (judging from the agorism thing).

To be consistent with the laws of human nature (specifically the inherent self-ownership and self-dominion of each individual), the emphasis of such security measures should be increasingly in the direction of crime deterrence, while consistently moving away from invasive follow-up measures, and deterrence measures that inflict permanent harm.

That'd be the ideal way to do it. However, this makes me wonder, how do we deter government from destroying the value we build in this new market (by fines and arrests for instance)? Of course, we need to develop self defense mechanisms, just in case, but let's shoot for the moon first and then we might as well get to the orbit. How do we deter the government, make it so that they actually do not want or just do not dare to touch us?

An immediate idea that comes to my mind is a bad idea - to collude with them, somehow make them the benefactors of our market. But then we might as well just agree to pay taxes and play by their rules - so that's definitely out of the question. What else is left? Making it too expensive for them to target us? Perhaps we could do this by making our network at the same time decentralized and "tight". Decentralization would help because they could never take out one entity and destroy the whole market (think peer to peer networks), but tight inter-relationships might make it too expensive for government to even target a single entity of this market without facing some sort of a retribution. Perhaps we need to get a hold of a particular valuable part of the existing market, a part which government finds it in their interest to keep stable, and keep that going so long as we believe it is better to keep it stable than to let it go, until the time comes to let it go, the time when the new market will be a de-facto winner and governments de-facto too weak to do anything about us.

To clarify, we would take control of a particular sensitive part of the existing market in a way that would make participants of the new market a crucial part of it, therefore making it too expensive for government not to turn a blind eye on us. This then buys us sufficient amount of safety and time to build up our market at the expense of the existing one and weaken government to a point at which even once we let go of the old part we were controlling, they would be just too weak to do anything about it.

It's like a hostage situation. We take control of something that government really wants to keep stable and keep it stable so long as government agrees to leave us alone.

And now I'm feeling like a god damn criminal for speaking such things.

The created vs developed thing means that to build a sustainable, adaptive market it needs to happen and "grow" rather than planning it out and one days saying "Go!".

Yes I agree, but there is a bit of an irony here. People who really dare to champion this new freedom market regardless of it essentially being forbidden are people like us, anarcho-capitalists and the like, those considered as "radicals" by the rest. And if we happen to consent to a particular strategy of building it because this is the solution we found most efficient we would in a way doing it both "by design" and "by nature", in a sense both synthetically and organically at the same time.

It's like this. We interact and by interacting reinforce each others belief that government is a problem. Therefore our market already recognized a demand (problem) and now we need to come up with the supply (solution). Among various solutions being "sold" on forums like this one eventually most of us pick one and choose to go with it therefore defacto designing the new market - even though design was never coordinated by anything more than mere consented relationships.

It's a beautiful thing.

[ancapagency]

Great! Ancap Agency is a great start. Hopefully some of its services will have an international reach soon as well (if not already).

Nope--at this point, we're almost exclusively marketing to Porcupines and "fellow travelers" in the Free State.  International (and even interstate) markets are not feasible from a cost/benefit standpoint.