If you reject the idea that corporations can’t exist without government then you must also reject the idea that lawsuits and court action can exist without government. In fact, you must reject the whole idea of binding contracts.
I didn’t think that Rudolf Rocker quote would take off like that.
I probably should have added the cavaet that I’m not an anarcho-syndicalist and not the biggest fan of unions. But the quote itself was pretty good and I thought captured the essence of anarchism which is that when people are left to their own devices, as a whole, they will always produce for themselves and for society at their maximum ability*.
*Sort of. Some might be lazy, others might focus on inefficient subjects or methods, but that’s expected because we are all human, after all. No one and no system is perfect.
A specter is haunting the modern world, the specter of crypto anarchy.
Computer technology is on the verge of providing the ability for individuals and groups to communicate and interact with each other in a totally anonymous manner. Two persons may exchange messages, conduct business, and negotiate electronic contracts without ever knowing the True Name, or legal identity, of the other. Interactions over networks will be untraceable, via extensive re- routing of encrypted packets and tamper-proof boxes which implement cryptographic protocols with nearly perfect assurance against any tampering. Reputations will be of central importance, far more important in dealings than even the credit ratings of today. These developments will alter completely the nature of government regulation, the ability to tax and control economic interactions, the ability to keep information secret, and will even alter the nature of trust and reputation.
The technology for this revolution—and it surely will be both a social and economic revolution—has existed in theory for the past decade. The methods are based upon public-key encryption, zero-knowledge interactive proof systems, and various software protocols for interaction, authentication, and verification. The focus has until now been on academic conferences in Europe and the U.S., conferences monitored closely by the National Security Agency. But only recently have computer networks and personal computers attained sufficient speed to make the ideas practically realizable. And the next ten years will bring enough additional speed to make the ideas economically feasible and essentially unstoppable. High-speed networks, ISDN, tamper-proof boxes, smart cards, satellites, Ku-band transmitters, multi-MIPS personal computers, and encryption chips now under development will be some of the enabling technologies.
The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration. Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be trade freely and will allow illicit and stolen materials to be traded. An anonymous computerized market will even make possible abhorrent markets for assassinations and extortion. Various criminal and foreign elements will be active users of CryptoNet. But this will not halt the spread of crypto anarchy.
Just as the technology of printing altered and reduced the power of medieval guilds and the social power structure, so too will cryptologic methods fundamentally alter the nature of corporations and of government interference in economic transactions. Combined with emerging information markets, crypto anarchy will create a liquid market for any and all material which can be put into words and pictures. And just as a seemingly minor invention like barbed wire made possible the fencing-off of vast ranches and farms, thus altering forever the concepts of land and property rights in the frontier West, so too will the seemingly minor discovery out of an arcane branch of mathematics come to be the wire clippers which dismantle the barbed wire around intellectual property.
Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!— Timothy C. May - The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto - c. 1988 (!!!)
The free market is people, not corporations.
but… corporations are just a collection of people…
No, firms, businesses, are just collections of people.
Corporations are chartered by the state and given special privileges, immunity of individuals working for the corporation from prosecution for crimes for instance.
Corporations don’t have to be chartered through the state.
If it weren’t for limited liability protection, so many less businesses would exist, less money would be pooled for investment, less ideas would come to fruition and the world would be worse off.
Corporations, LLCs, partnerships, etc, have done much more good for humanity than bad.
I’ve stressed this point a zillion times, especially with groups like Build-a-burger and Illumazombies, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with these groups if it weren’t for the existence of government. The problem, at it’s root, isn’t corporations or lobbyists or special interests. The root of all these “evils” is a government that the people entrust with power that is capable of corruption and more than willing to grant special privileges to these specific groups/individuals/companies.
You eliminate their source of corruption and you will eliminate their corruption.
But please tell me more about how the New World Order is going to take over without government.
On The Idea of Race
The whole idea of “race” of belonging to a specific country is silly. I think I’m more and more coming to the conclusion that race is bullshit and the sooner we get over that ignorant idea, the sooner this Earth will be a better place to live.
It’s silly that people think there’s a real difference between humans outside of cultural and skin-level appearance all based on some geographical lotto. As if being born in a location designated by a certain name or defined by a certain language or religion somehow makes you different in ways which others can not achieve after birth.
It’s silly to think that you have some sort of claim of superiority or a reason to be proud of being a specific race simply because generations ago, your ancestors mated and birthed in a specific location.
So, how exactly do we define and determine what we are? How many generations do we have to go back? A 1? 10? 100? 1,000? At a certain point, the country you choose to associate with didn’t even exist. What to do then? Pick a different one? Pick the one that occupied those same lands? Trace the ancestry even further?
You do that and you find that we are all technically African. What now? Has this information ruined your tilted view of heritage? Will you now claim to be African or, more simply, human? Or do you want to continue the charade of “picking sides”?
If you’re going to define your race or culture based on arbitrarily selecting a point in time when a certain ancestor was born in a certain land then you give birth to an infinite number of new issues. What if that country doesn’t exist anymore? What if the land has changed names and cultures a 1,000 times over? What if there’s been cross breeding with other “races”, which race do you select? Do you go with your father’s ancestry because of how masculine the entire race debate is or do you go with your mothers due to the scientific evidence found in mitochondria. And who determines how many generations you have to trace your heritage back. What, essentially, gives you the right to claim a specific race?
Since we aren’t dating to the beginning of humanity and the establishment of your race category is based on an arbitrary time, why can’t people just pick any race simply because they were born there or because they lived there or simply because they adopt that culture? What difference is there in doing that as opposed to randomly selecting an event of birth from a random moment in time?
In 10,000 years, can my ancestors claim that they are American simply because I was born in America and there is no history beyond my birth. Would that make sense?
It’s silly to say that due to the location of birth of your parents or even yourself that you are now to ascribe or even pay dues to that region or that you have some sort of necessary obligation to that place on a map.
If I adopted every aspect of Swedish life and culture and dropped every aspect of Armenian culture, would I still be an Armenian? Or would I be a Swedish individual? Would I still be American?
What if your original ancestors where born in Turkish region and moved to the Armenian region directly after birth, but nothing else about you or your family history was different. Would that mean your heritage and race is now Turkish? Or would you still consider yourself an Armenian?
Like I said, Nationalism; the downfall of humanity.