Dec 2, 2019, 4:34 PM
(Again: Libertine, Anarchist, Libertarian Thought Fails)
By: Alain Dwight (via Brandon Hayes)
Rules without rulers is impossible. Asserting an active noun or verb (rule) without an actor putting it in play (rulers) is a form of deception. For a sentence to be operationally complete it has to include the actor, the incentive they follow, the change in state and a few other points (P epistemology is the first place I saw this standard detailed).
Human flourishing was never created by anarchists, anarchists were always subversive as far as I know, countersignalling our ancestors that created flourishing through rule of law.
Between sovereign entities, there can be no authority but reciprocity can be calculated hence rule of law measured by reciprocity is the only actual alternative to authority.
Anarchism can be an appealing narrative when seeing the abuse of power but in part, it I think it appeals more ot the juvenile part of us that desires freedom than the part that desires the discipline required to create freedom. If you operationalize the narrative then Propertarianism is what you’re left with.
I don’t want to rebel against power I want to have power and to have other good men have power.
When good men fall into the vice of not seeking power then it calls into question how good they really are.
Edit