You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemit is Free, But Your Witness Vote Determines its Future
If you're a liberty minded individual, I'd advice you to vote for liberty minded people. Luke is a great choice, both because of his personal philosophical leanings but also because he's just a good tech guy. Looks like he'll make a good proxy too for now.
Thanks so much for that vote of confidence. :)
Thank you for your reply @the-ego-is-you, you are the 2nd to confirm my decision to give my proxy to Luke.
I read this, this morning: (almost exactly the same time you posted your response)
Emphasis mine
SDG
I'm an antitheist. But if you're voting for Luke, we'll get along fine in this context. =)
Thank you @the-ego-is-you, I'm a follower of Christ and I would consider myself a voluntaryist as well. I agree, "we'll get along fine in this context." =)
SDG
I'm also an anarcho-capitalist and co-agorist (not konkin agorist). Nice seeing you here! =)
Likewise, nice meeting you as well. I will be looking forward to future dialogue.
Can you explain to me your definition of co-agorist?
Basically it's an idea and strategy to bring about a free and more prosperous society on the back of inter-contracting cooperative organisations.
For example, one such setup could be a blockchain, where every user connects voluntarily because he agrees with the ideals of the system. An even better would be two or more blockchains voluntarily connecting with eachother to become stronger as a network by utilizing synergy between the two in some way.
CoAgorists don't necessarily accept all of Konkins philosophical views or strategic outlooks. We may vote if we consider it a working strategy, the replacement of the state can be considered to be more gradual than an outright violent overthrow and the focus on specifically black markets is less emphasized for practical reasons.
So, excuse my ignorance, but is this something like what L Neil Smith writes in The Probability Broach? Will Ethereum and EOS be the vehicles for this?
Have you read any of Paul Rosenberg's blog at the Freeman's Perspective?
By all means, ask more and we'll all learn more!
I for one have not read L Neil Smith or Paul Rosenberg, although I'm pretty sure I've heard the latter speak at some point. The Probability Approach does seem to contain some similar ideas, but I'm not gonna say they are exactly the same since I've not read it.
As an anarcho-capitalist ('voluntaryist' if you rather use that and I'm sure we're pretty much on the same page, although I find the meaning to be ambigious sometimes) the only agreements I support enforcing are contractual and based on property rights. That kind of government – not a state, but voluntary for all that don't agress – that can uphold ethics, will not come into being unless we make an organized – not "centralized" – effort.
That's what the cooperatives/individuals contracting with eachother is about. The better products and contracts we can establish, the better society can be made from that point on. It's all about establishing better institutions than the ones we have right now.
So yes, Ethereum and EOS are perfect (insofar as they work) examples of this mode of thinking. They enable more freedom, greater stability and will end up transforming the world as we know it; Rather than relying on going through the established political institutions, we are instead amending the culture that they operate in, by means of technological and organisational breakthrough.
And it's working. This is why you'll see more and more governments and big banking organisations start to mimic and take after what we are doing right here. Soon, just like companies in a free market enviroment, they must be enough like us, or their "customers" start to rebell –– either by avoiding their wealth traps, or by violently kicking them out.