Floor Plan

[dentistsugardust]

If the slate of state and government randomness were wiped completely clean tomorrow, where would we begin the first steps to the big picture of a realized freedom? Do we approach one another with ideas in structure to live by, or do we just let it be?
waking up one morning with this as a reality would be quite mind blowing and mentally taxing if it where to just drop out of the sky. Can you imagine theft where the thief becomes confused because of the realization of his conformed life structure, need no longer exist? how do we help him arrive at the same realizations? what are these realizations? how do we address relapse? would there be a need for a form of order or structure to be set in place?

And then you have to look at big business. tear it down or maintain in particulars, you know, the good parts that help us all. Hell what would having a job mean?
who is to address and answer the questions of the immediate affected populace? and if another group within the populace, opposes the initial views, where are we then? is it feasible to do away with the control or guidelines factor?

we can talk about "No State" all day long, but we've got nothing if there isn't a blueprint.

one section at a time seems plausible until you look at juggernaut business. particularly the ones that conduct all across the globe. how about starting this out within so-called "American Soil"? No American company can do business outside of America. our main goal outside of America would be to assist and educate (not exclusive to our ideology) in upstart agriculture in impoverished continents. Helping humanity along, while not being attracted to conquest.

this is becoming huge thought, and although I don't have the education, i feel that I'm approaching with a level of common sense. but right now it's a hot day and my concentration is interrupted by this heat. Hopefully I'm clear at my attempt in another angle in dialogue on the subject of "No State".

[lummox2]

Imagine you live in a house where for as long as anyoen can remember, a large man has been sitting at the dinner table, demanding food and drink and providing nothing in return.

Every time you want to do anything in the house, such as go to the toilet, get yourself a drink, move from room to room or pretty much anything you have to go to him for a ticket, which he will either give you or not depending upon his mood. If you try to do any of these things without a ticket, he becomes very upset, threatening and in extreme cases attacking you.

Over long years, your older brother has accumulated lots of these tickets and can come and go pretty much as he likes, and do whatever he wants to. You, on the other hand , have to do lots of menial tasks for both the large man and your brother (who is roughly the same size and strength as you are) in order to get tickets to perform the most basic of functions.

Your brother still has to do the odd job for the large man, but nothing to onerous, the big fellah has got this thing about his ticket system and likes anyone who has plenty of them.

One day the big man gets sick. His strength seems to be failing him. His demands for more and more actions from you coincide (that he needs for support)with a dimishing of his strength and therefore ability to make you use his ticket system. your brother, rather obviously given his benefits in this system, tries to convince you to keep using it, wheedling, lying and anything else he can think of to keep you supporting the failing large man.

THe large man, in his turn, grows more and more desperate for medicine, food and water, requiring constant attention. Not being too sure of his current ability to hurt you, you comply. As he gets more sick, he becomes more irrational, more violent.

Finally, just as his violence reaches it's height, he dies.

While you are used to the ticket system, and your brother is firmly in favour of it, he has no force without the man to compel you. Suddenly you can easily do a lot of things that were difficult or costly in the past. On the other hand, your brother is now having to learn to work to get by. He's not used to it at all and isn't very good at it. You help him, he is your brother, after all and he needs you.

[creolefood]

dentistsugardust,
You seem to be asking, how could we function without the state? or, who would do the things that the state formerly did? Well, the answer is, "I don't know." Contrast that to politicians, bureaucrats and those emotionally wed to the state; they will preach to you all day long that they have a "plan" or "system" that will coordinate billions of individual transactions perfectly so that absolutely no one will get hurt and everyone will be perfectly content. Also, please bear in mind that there are things (maybe most things) that the state does that there would be absolutely no demand for in a voluntary society.

Let me answer your questions with another question: Let's suppose that at the beginning of the computer industry, someone asked: who is going to determine how many computers are produced? who will determine what types to make? how will the computer industry know what next technological advance to pursue? how will the computer makers distribute their products? who will determine the best way for computer buyers to use their products? O.K., I think you get the point. There was no "committee" that decided all these things; there was no "five year plan;" these questions and countless others were answered by countless billions, nay trillions, of individual decisions and interactions.

I doubt that the "state" will be erased in one fell swoop; but if it were, only good would result. Yes, thieves (i.e., politicians, government employees and those who "benefit" from the state) would have a difficult time but....so what? We should care only to the extent that we'd need to protect ourself from them.

[dentistsugardust]

just trying to comprehend the running of, from that very point on out.

[dentistsugardust]

don't get the wrong idea. I'm not afraid. it just appears tricky at the turn inside of the turning point. we throw our hands up all at once, shouting we did it, is what I'm getting and that's the issue i've addressed and still stumped. is this an oversight on our part? or am
I just shell shocked by the evil that men do and have done.

[dentistsugardust]

yes, but there was an engineer who led others only because of the ingenuity of his innovative thoughts in leading into this brainstorm. we can say nice job and i'm proud, but is that enough for free men?
if we have these operations, buying, selling and all the types of interactive industry. who will notice if something is not quite right? if something is moving in the wrong direction? how do we collectively make those decisions? there will always be "greenhorns" or someone who knows how and some who are students. how to arrive to a humble society. imagine trying out for a job and you just don't quite get the hang of it. so they let you go. who will say this to you? what if you are stubborn and insist that you do have what takes. how will the collective decide, at least these small beastly things?

[NonEntity]

do you need someone to tell you when to go to the bathroom? "who will notice if something is not right?" well, uh, i sorta get this urge, and then i try and decide, let's see, do i want to find a bathroom or maybe wait until next week when someone provides me with plans for this...? and then, hmm, by that time do you think that maybe they will have figured out what to do with my soiled clothing, or maybe that will take another few weeks, or maybe an election cycle or what?

there IS NO THEM. ("how will the collective decide...?") (THEM is the aggregation of all of the little USes.)

if you can't figure out how to make a decision for yourself, do you expect someone who doesn't know you to be able to do that better?

- NonE

[NonEntity]

I remember a school I went to long ago. They had no plans for the walkways between buildings. They simply watched where the students created dirt paths in the lawns and then applied paving material there...

- NonE

[Darren Dirt]

lummox: FANTASTIC little story/illustration/metaphor.



dentist: in response to creole's excellent computer-industry analogy, be careful that you aren't comparing apples to oranges -- after all, the teams of businesspeople that design a computer (or decides on their marketing plan) needs no authority to be given to them by the consumers to direct that design, and they do not impose said design on the consuming masses at gunpoint. Both apply to the "state" at the present momuhnt, sadly.


But in the coming "Libertopia" I doubt that anyone would have the nerve to try imposing a "hey here's what I think the rules should be for your life" belief system on anyone else, at least not after the gun barrels are pointed at them in response.

Plus, remember, the "employee" role most people play out today implies a third party -- the "state" -- for "protection" against various labour "evils".

But in the future, and even today, working in a "j.o.b." is a 2-sided agreement, that you will "obey" the commands of the folk(s) who you have consented to commanding you... Whereas the gubmint command-ers have not bothered to get your consent. And in the freedomfuture that will not just be unpopular, it will be unacceptable (if not fatal!)

I doubt in the future most people will move away from indepdent-vendor type of livelihoods; if they decide to almost duplicate the "employee/employer" ever-expanding concept we know and loathe today, that's their choice -- but they won't be able to violent impose that on the rest of folks!

[dentistsugardust]

Thank you, I need and want the feedback and I'm feeling that it should have circulation in thought because theory is nice but we all know consequences of what assumption births. after all these are our one chanced lives. I'm just putting the feelers out on subjects such as relapse. when johnny goes ballistic, do you call harold and he calls shirley until we've got most aware and so what action do we take to calm johnny down. and what if johnny has a following. his own inner circle support. the relapse

[dentistsugardust]

We talk of all the bad things that institution has inflicted, but are there any good things?
in my school "daze", i recall all the asians grouping and all the latin grouping and all the black, white. at this level we could assume that this is due to how governments playing part of domination has inflicted us with a fear of distrust. but if you look at living things in general, it is like this. the bonding of like kinds. any infraction to any of these like kinds would cause a disruption within their freedom and a lashing out onto the disrupter. after understanding life history, what makes us so confident that the idea of no state could exist beyond the grip of learned lessons? the question, what bad things has a police department prevented? If you looked down at the small creatures that roam the earth, you'll notice that sometimes, they are, attacking their own. With the capability of reason, we are supposed to possess a power of deterent. but natural things happen. Like birth defects. and so history keeps us evolving into direction in dealing for and with the afflicted. other than human, why do other living things attack each other? is it random violence or was their a violation? was it done for the sake of keeping the colony strong (as in the case, the kingdom of ants)? are they bound by inherent laws or are they reactionary to disruption of their life? and is any of their judgement, if you wanna call it that, fair and unfair? I'm just saying, we coexist with these traits and they haven't gone unnoticed (the history of the evil men do). will we collectively, cold-bloodedly take down a threat to our way of life or will their be grievers opposing the take down? and is the natural way of things as they should be or do we exercise our ability at reasoning and thinking and examining and filter through of "How-To-Do's".

here's a thought: if a motorist begins plowing into pedestrians and one of us becomes fatally injured in the attempt to stop him, if this happens enough times (one becoming a fatality in persuit of nullifying a threat) the reaction of society begins to wane on becoming involved if they see the outcome is to risky. do we wait around to see or let the spirit or life force revive naturally, instinctively or do we induce it by total commitment to one another? Are governments the reason that we sit among our own in school during lunchtime or is it inherent? everywhere that I see the crowd mixed, there is mind present. therefore, I can't see at this point where we are at a total confidence of understanding liberty and freedom to throw our hands up, shouting " we did it" "no more government" Yay! when we are knowing that we know better. we've learned and the unforseen's become clear in their predictable pattern.

[dentistsugardust]

Now I do find what robert menard suggests; people existing under separate but parallel existance. is it possible that, for example, half of the people in the united states could be "off the grid" and half could participate within the social security number system. this is an interesting competition to contemplate. hell, we've already got two dominate parties vying for citizens. why not take it to the next level. that way we know what is what and who's who. this appeals to me as an alternative to what the reality now is.

[NonEntity]

Why are you asking what we would do? The only person you can know is yourself. Do abdicate all control of yourself and give it to someone else? How can you possibly presume to speak for someone else? You certainly don't have my permission to speak for me.

- NonE

[dentistsugardust]

and so we've just discovered a disagreement that has arrived at assumption based on how i may or may not relate my messages well. surely i wasn't implying to speak for others.
at the civilian round table we can come to an agreement so tight that we should become confident that within in any of our absences, we could depend on anyone of us repping any of us because our ideology is all for one, one for all. if our pact, natural or document, is written in stone, there should be no quarrel because at the round table, we have mapped or structured the actualities and carry on from there. history gave us these maps and we cannot just dash these learned lessons against the rocks without fore-thought.

[NonEntity]

I've given plenty of forethought. I don't allow anyone to speak for me, although many are presumptuous to think they may. You seem to be one of them.

- NonE