Anarchy works.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Kylesa, Oct 4, 2010.

  1. I tried explaining this concept in another thread I made a few months back. I believe anarchy (I'm a follower of anarcho-capitalist ideology) will work because spontaneous order will allow us as individuals to self-regulate, and this extends infinitely outwards, even for large businesses. We've never had true market competition, so we've never seen it work, but examples like the video below are promising, even if at a micro level.

    [ame=]YouTube - Deregulated Roads: The Netherlands Experience[/ame]
  2. I liked the part where the cyclist swerves right in front of the car and the car stops like it aint no thing.

    This turns driving back into a conscious effort, great thing.
  3. Cool video!

    Stop looking at the road signs and start looking at each other...
  4. makes perfect sense in a place full of level headed people. some how i think this would fail in america.

    just in my little area ive noticed quite a few wealthier folks drive like they own the road. this kind of thing would fail instantly with people who have a sense of entitlement.
  5. yeah, in a country of smart and considerate people it would be ideal. Unfortunately millions of americans need instructions for everything, and need to be led around by someone.
  6. pssht the fact is anarchy wont work. it would be chaos on the streets. as much as i hate all governments i realize that the current system is the only way. also communism would be way better. communism is the idea that everything should be shared equally between the poeple not whatever the fuck the u.s. government wants people to think it is. but who cares about all this shit anyways? it'll most likely never change at least in our lifetimes anyways.:smoke::smoke:
  7. Some would say that's only because we've lived under the nanny state for too long... :smoke:

  8. [​IMG]
  9. ^^^ That is the point, you've got to be able to see the bigger picture, then your individual role becomes defined ^^^
  10. I disagree with you guys, I think this would work perfectly in America. The same reasons why it work in the Netherlands are the same reasons it would work here. The reason why it works, is because your own safety is put in your own hands, and when you're in control of your fate and your person, you're more likely to make better decisions. The fact is, traffic laws do not make us safer, they slow down traffic, and they make drivers less confident in their own ability. This concept is universal, it doesn't matter if it's applied in the US or the Netherlands. When individuals are allowed to act as individuals, and every individual is given the freedom to pursue their own self-interest, harmony is created out of seeming chaos. The reason why there hasn't been accidents is because top-down authority just doesn't work, and as ridiculous as it sounds, stop signs and traffic lights are top-down authority, and city planners will never be able to use traffic laws to keep people safe because of the same reason central planners will never be able to centrally plan an economy. The knowledge problem.
  11. I think you're right, but I also agree with August and aaron...

    It would work here just like anywhere else, but implementation would be a bitch. The only reason it would be a bitch is because we have had the nanny state for too long.
  12. Which is why we should be gradually shifting to this self regulating system rather than taking steps further away.
  13. It's not really anarchy. It's just a roundabout. It's a more efficient means of designing intersections and handling traffic flow issues. When I ran for city council in my hometown last year I wanted to replace existing intersections on the main highway in town with roundabouts. The city and county were going to spend $40+ million to add additional lanes to handle the traffic. The number of lanes are not the issue. Two lanes can handle just as much traffic as four lanes. It's really about how efficiently you can design your interchanges to reduce bottlenecks. Roundabouts work because traffic never stops flowing, increasing traffic flow by up to 75%. The roundabouts would have saved taxpayers about $35 million and made our traffic problems a lot better in my city but... well... people like very expensive "fixes" over rational ones. So I lost.

    Most of Europe understands this and are adopting roundabouts instead of traffic light governed intersections. About 80% of all intersections in France use roundabouts instead of four way stops. The IIHS released a study about this several years ago that I found very useful.
  14. I agree, a roundabout hardly constitutes "anarchy".

    We have tons of them around here, and people drive like retards in them. I have to go through one 4 times a day on my way to/from work (and home for lunch), and it makes my blood pressure go up every time, because people don't understand it. They stop in the middle, cut people off, run others off the road... it's ridiculous. No amount of signage or arrows seems to help. It keeps traffic flowing until there's the inevitable weekly accident.
  15. How is it not anarchy? They aren't talking about simply the roundabout... There are no street signs, no lines on the road... You can't even tell the difference between the sidewalks and the road!

    And I guess the street in Hanoi isn't really anarchy, either?

    [ame=]YouTube - self-organization in hanoi traffic[/ame]

    The simple fact of the matter is that when people are expected to take care of themselves, people make better decisions. When people expect to be cared for, they make poor decisions.

    I like how you are perfectly exemplifying the point in the video, Penelope. You are obviously an angry driver because these other drivers don't understand the 'rules of the road'. What if there were no 'rules of the road' to understand? What if you actually had to slow down and look and see what others were doing?
  16. It's not anarchy because it's a road, not a system of governance or a society. It's road with rules established by the government. No, there aren't any signs but there are still rules and penalties for breaking those rules. It is a better traffic control design but it's not anarchy. But I'm not going to argue this point anymore.

    I agree, it is better to leave individuals alone to pursue their own self-interest.
  17. This is certainly true, the Government has a hard time giving up it's dictatorial and monopoly power, so I certainly agree on this point. This is the main reason why shit like this (Completely deregulated traffic) only happens in smaller European countries, because even though these countries are socialist and what-not, they actually care about what works.

    I disagree. I believe in anarchy for the same reasons that this traffic idea works. Spontaneous order and emergence. Simply deregulating a single road may not be the summation of an entire system of governance, but it's testing the main impetus behind anarchy, and it works.

    Sounds to me like you're nitpicking. I see some of the worst drivers who follow traffic rules to a 't'. I break traffic laws every time I'm in a car, probably hundreds of times every time I drive, but I can assure you I'm a safer (albeit faster) driver than a vast majority of the people on the roads. Traffic laws tell you that if you don't go the speed on the signs, you're a bad driver. They make drivers who are normally sheeps unsure of themselves. I don't even think the traffic light issue needs to be even addressed, anyone who thinks a traffic light is a good idea, well, I have no words for you. Traffic lights are the most inefficient, terrible ideas ever. Sitting at a redlight at an intersection as two or three in the morning when it's clear that NO ONE is coming, is just a retarded waste of time.

    Also, are you talking about a CIRCLE or a roundabout? They're completely different, and I agree, circles are frustrating, notice how they have stop signs and all that jazz.
  18. If you were really an anarchist like the subtext of your avatar suggests, you would know that anarchy isn't a system of governance or a society, either. It can't be. That would be an oxymoron. You can not implement anarchy, because there is nothing to be implemented. It can't be a system of governance because it is the lack of governance.

    Being an anarchist is a choice one makes, a lifestyle one chooses. It is not a system. This roundabout is anarchy, because it is the lack of a structured system. I guess it isn't anarchy unless there are black cats and red (A) symbols everywhere, amirite? Torch the intersection! Power to the Proletariat!
  19. Except for the fact that it is a road with a structured system. Instead of lights governing the intersection there is a small slightly elevated island that does it instead. Instead of stopping half the traffic at any given time, traffic simply keeps moving. There are still places to walk across and there are still rules that govern the intersection. The only difference is you don't stop when you're moving through it. It's road. It's not anarchy.

Share This Page