Skeptic Project

So what?

The end result is what matters.

Clearly he isn't some radical socialist trying to ram something through because nothing got rammed through.

Your political paranoia is off the charts.

I don't even know what the hell you're saying other than showing everyone the political chip on your shoulder.

Matt,

In truth I don't think there is a coherent theory to place them under other than a derivative form of Libertarianism. The problem is I don't think we can separate social forms from economic forms, and that includes political activity. This notion that we can have an economic order without a social order rests on this false axiom, and this is precisely what paralyzes RBE. Where there is association, there is a need for social order. As long as RBE denies this issue, it will continue to be a formless, decrepit derivative of Libertarianism. As for Libertarians, there is a great deal wrong with their theory, including an over-zealous faith in free market behaviors and so on. But that's neither here nor there, the point is that even mainstream Libertarians still understand there is a role for government, even if it is greatly reduced. I personally think they're wrong, but they aren't quite as ludicrous as TZM and TVP RBE proponents.

The Beck joke was a mocking of TZM members who take him seriously. It seems like you and they have something in common.

@Falkner,

So its basically libertardianism with some pseudo-science thrown in.

That works.

The economic philosophy is so different from libertardianism though.

I think that's a fair assesment, and why I don't see a very good parallel for them in terms of other theories. I suppose it would be Anarcho-Socialism in that it relies on indviduals to want to help others out of their own free will, and to have effectively running and fair associations without the need for a mediator. These are all foolish assumptions, and precisely why RBE deserves no respect. It is a hybrid of Marxist-Libertarian-Anarchist thought that inevitable kills it in the crib. there is nothing coherent or practical about their current system.

Warmer

What Would An Anarcho-Socialist Economy Look Like?

by Keith Preston

http://www.anti-state.com/preston/preston5.html</p>

"The sustainability of a socialist-anarchist economy would largely be dependent upon the natural system of checks and balances resulting from the dramatic alteration of the labor market that would occur following the abolition of the state."

-----

That's stupid, because it requires that I believe a natural system of checks and balances would result from the abolition of the state. History shows time and time again that this is not what happens.

Matt, I think Preston is referring to an ideal situation rather than one based on reality.

"Matt, I think Preston is referring to an ideal situation rather than one based on reality."

I don't understand the point of doing that.

Unless the point is to daydream about his political philosophy.

This inherent contradiction is as follows:

RBE asserts no position for the state, and thus becomes a quasi-anarchist theory. However, this is directly contradictory to the tenable portions of the other two theories (Libertarianism and Marxism) which both rely on the existence of the state to some capacity to be viable. In Libertarianism, the government still serves a specific funtion of maintaining laws and protecting rights. In Marxism the state is the expression of proletarian demands. RBE borrows heavily from Libertarian economic freedom and from Marxist anti-capitalism, but fails to see how there is still a need for a state form. This is the specific contraditiction I see in RBE. Now, there are problems with all these theories separately, but that's not the discussion as I understand it.

I don't know. I still see it as straight up anarchism. The scientists would be the leaders. The technology would be the infrastructure.

So the scientists are "the state."

This is just technocracy crap, except run by hippies to avoid nasty topics like eugenics.

Fundamentally, I don't understand how a society of any kind cannot have a ruling class. An anarchist society still has a ruling class. They just happen to the majority.

I suppose education would provide the base for understanding and knowledge, which would guide people into become scientists - and thus, the future leaders.