G20 Protests Become Violent - Page 20

On June 29 2010 04:37 Yuljan wrote:


the state is necessary for the current capital system to function. Keep in mind how it came to be that money became our currency. These papers were convertibly into gold thats what gave them their value. As the trust in the currency and governments increased the guarantee to convert money into gold wasnt needed anymore. So basically nowadays money is only worth something because everyone believes its worth something.
Capitalism and total freedom? Cant work. So therefore its incompatible. The State isnt necessary for capitalism to work but if people lose faith in the currency after an Anarchist revolution what do we trade for? States are needed for currency and without currency capitalism doesnt work. How do you charge interest in a barter economy? Or do you abolish interest? Dont even let me get started it cant work.

On June 29 2010 05:09 xDaunt wrote:


Call it what you want, but the end result is the same. Anarchists want to tear down the state. They have a long history of violently seeking that end. Anarchists often have worked with communists and other revolutionaries to tear down the state. So even assuming that the anarchists don't want power for themselves, they are creating the power vacuums that allows other tyrants to take power. Again, look at the Russian Revolution. There's no better example.

As I said before, there's no such thing as a good anarchist. Even if the anarchist does not want power for himself or his group, he's still tearing down the state (usually violently) and creating the conditions that allow for very bad individuals and groups to take power. Even assuming that the anarchist has "good intentions," there is no justification for his positions and what he does. At best, anarchists are useful idiots.

States are needed for currency

On June 29 2010 05:46 dvide wrote:

This is where you trip up. States want control of the money supply and interest rates for obvious reasons, so that they can print money without having to directly tax people. They get the full value of the currency before inflation kicks in and wipes out that proportional amount from everyone's savings. In effect it is a hidden regressive tax.

But of course the state isn't required to have violent control over currency. For example, prior to 1913 this wasn't the case in the United States. With the creation of the Federal Reserve the value of the dollar has declined by over 95% because of expansion of the money supply. In a free and open market of competing currencies this doesn't tend to happen, and de facto standards do emerge naturally. Gold became one such de facto standard because it makes a good currency:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtF_zbI5j7M

On June 29 2010 04:29 Yurebis wrote:

You seem to be under the impression that
1- The state is necessary for the current capitalist system to function
or
2- Anarchism is incompatible with capitalism.
which are both arguably false.

On June 29 2010 05:46 dvide wrote:

This is where you trip up. States want control of the money supply and interest rates for obvious reasons, so that they can print money without having to directly tax people. They get the full value of the currency before inflation kicks in and wipes out that proportional amount from everyone's savings. In effect it is a hidden regressive tax.

But of course the state isn't required to have violent control over currency. For example, prior to 1913 this wasn't the case in the United States. With the creation of the Federal Reserve the value of the dollar has declined by over 95% because of expansion of the money supply. In a free and open market of competing currencies this doesn't tend to happen, and de facto standards do emerge naturally. Gold became one such de facto standard because it makes a good currency:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtF_zbI5j7M

On June 29 2010 06:01 Yuljan wrote:


you do know fixed gold standards were one of the main reasons for the great depression? And the "printed money" is only a real small part of actual money. States no longer create money banks do. Btw thats why we need states too.

On June 29 2010 04:37 Yuljan wrote:


the state is necessary for the current capital system to function. Keep in mind how it came to be that money became our currency. These papers were convertibly into gold thats what gave them their value. As the trust in the currency and governments increased the guarantee to convert money into gold wasnt needed anymore. So basically nowadays money is only worth something because everyone believes its worth something.
Capitalism and total freedom? Cant work. So therefore its incompatible. The State isnt necessary for capitalism to work but if people lose faith in the currency after an Anarchist revolution what do we trade for? States are needed for currency and without currency capitalism doesnt work. How do you charge interest in a barter economy? Or do you abolish interest? Dont even let me get started it cant work.

On June 29 2010 06:24 EpiCenteR wrote:

Lol, so only the government can produce a stable currency? Us dollar purchasing power chart:

On June 29 2010 05:31 Yurebis wrote:

Banks can exist without a state. There has been and there still is such a thing as a private bank. Banks can settle issuances of different coins and checks not unlike international governments do. Interest is a function of time preference and not relevant to the state at all. One can't abolish time preference as much as one can't abolish chocolate-ice-cream-preference.


I'm sad you think that way.
So because there's always going to be a state, we need a state?

On June 29 2010 06:24 EpiCenteR wrote:

Lol, so only the government can produce a stable currency? Us dollar purchasing power chart:

On June 29 2010 05:41 Destro wrote:
supporting anarchy is like being against civilization itself.

annoying hippy students imo.

On June 29 2010 06:41 Yurebis wrote:
When you say "take down"... "wreckage"... I don't know if you're speaking figuratively but in case you're not... nothing has to be destroyed in the abolition of a state.

What happens is, people stop paying taxes, government goes bankrupt (oh wait, it already is), then people inside government will have to find voluntary (by voluntary, I mean non-coercive) jobs like anyone else, and those government services who were being paid by theft (taxation) will also have to be provided voluntarily like any other service in the market.