I support small government, but not no government. I respect anarchism and libertarianism, but I don’t think that type of society would work well enough for my liking.
Anarchism isn’t chaos, or no government. It’s not even strictly for “smaller” government. But flatter government. Anarchist organization and government aren’t oxymorons.
The anarchist movement has a massive messaging issue / needs to decide what it actually is. I think this problem is itself caused by the movement being made of anarchists, who do not as easily fall into a decision-making structure.
They are not anymore confused or vague than economic liberalism. Many like to pretend they’re libertarian. And others differ/clash over social and bigotry issues. Like Republicans and Democrats. Despite being similar economically.
If you’ve ever heard the phrase “power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely”. That is the kernel behind anarchism. Power should be kept as granular, diluted, and as flat as possible. As an effort to control and reduce corruption. Large complex hierarchies quickly go beyond being simply efficient mechanisms of administration. Into being structures to concentrate and abstract power. The only real debate or disagreement happens around where that divisor is. Antisocial ones who argue that even a neighborhood town Council are to authoritarian and dictatorial. All the way to the ones who are reasonably down for a permissive National Council of some sort.
If your main value is small government, have you looked into classical anarchism?
I support small government, but not no government. I respect anarchism and libertarianism, but I don’t think that type of society would work well enough for my liking.
Anarchism isn’t chaos, or no government. It’s not even strictly for “smaller” government. But flatter government. Anarchist organization and government aren’t oxymorons.
The anarchist movement has a massive messaging issue / needs to decide what it actually is. I think this problem is itself caused by the movement being made of anarchists, who do not as easily fall into a decision-making structure.
They are not anymore confused or vague than economic liberalism. Many like to pretend they’re libertarian. And others differ/clash over social and bigotry issues. Like Republicans and Democrats. Despite being similar economically.
If you’ve ever heard the phrase “power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely”. That is the kernel behind anarchism. Power should be kept as granular, diluted, and as flat as possible. As an effort to control and reduce corruption. Large complex hierarchies quickly go beyond being simply efficient mechanisms of administration. Into being structures to concentrate and abstract power. The only real debate or disagreement happens around where that divisor is. Antisocial ones who argue that even a neighborhood town Council are to authoritarian and dictatorial. All the way to the ones who are reasonably down for a permissive National Council of some sort.