You are combining two anarcho concepts. one where everything is privately owned and the other is the communist tribal concept which I think you are leaning towards.
Neither works in a large populated setting. That's why I equated the Globalist as the closest thing existing actually working in an anarchist mentality are international Globalists who all believe and act as if they are sovereign entities.
I do not lean towards the communist tribal concept. I believe in self-ownership, private property, and the non-aggression principle. Again you are stating your opinion that anarchy doesn't work in large populations, you realize that's not an argument right?
To equate the globalists with anarchy because you believe anarchy is impossible doesn't make any sense.
Show me Where is Anarchy actually in operation if not amongst the international elite?
There is no society that I know of that is completely anarcho-capitalist. If you think the international elite is an example of anarcho-capitalism, you don't know what it is.
I'm pasting parts of an answer I gave you to another comment here.
"Anarcho-capitalism can be found in everyday life. Like the fact that in many countries you can decide who to get married to as long as the other person decides to get married to you. You are not assigned a wife by the state.
As for an anarcho-capitalist society, Liberland is striving to get recognized as a sovereign country but as of today the closest you get to an anarcho-capitalist society is probably Lichtenstein.
http://tomwoods.com/ep-979-liechtenstein-the-closest-thing-to-a-libertarian-country/"
Lichtenstein is a state therefore proves my arguments of Statism regardless of its protection of property rights. Liberland is probably the closest thing to a non-state existence of anarchy - but why is it looking for acceptance as a State?
Closest is playing horseshoes. You're always going to need the rule of law and it's always going to be used against ordinary people. True Anarchy is a fantasy due to human nature of clubs and collusion, which is why I presented by publication with the setting of a social club bent on creating conspiracies to make their club "win".
The human nature argument is not valid, the only thing that is actually human nature is to adapt & reproduce. everything else we observe in humans is a result of their adapting (or mal-adapting) to their environment (physical, social, emotional).
It's human nature to hoard resources to survive; and to create associations to aid in survival. It is these associations that have grown to compete for the resources hence the need for the rule of law.
Humans, adapting to a paradigm based on the illusion of scarcity, will hoard resources. Without the intrinsic fear of not having enough created by this illusion, hoarding is nonsensical.
Creating associations is not a negative thing, unless inside of a paradigm based on competition, coercion, and disregard for the well-being of all life.
Hoarding is absolutely sensical for humans to plan to survive natural disasters. And to compete for those resources is natural. Again, however only Humans are smart enough to swear fealty to a fictional set of laws to guide through arbitration. But without force there no guarantee of compliance with those laws.
You're confusing Human Nature with The sociology of Apes in General. Not humans.
Actually, I'm not. I simply do not call something human nature just because it is the way that humans (on average) act inside of a very specific socio-economic model.
Would you really have me believe that everybody on this planet can be an individual sovereign being controlling enough personal resources to survive without a collective understanding of behavior being enforced by a third party against his will in the event of a violation of said understanding?
These are Humans:
True statement...
You're still not actually addressing my point, that human nature is only what is universal to humans, not what is present in some humans in a specific time, place, and socio-economic paradigm.
With humans, there is nothing universal or instinctual. Statistically speaking humans are like a virus on the earth consuming and hoarding to consume later and compete with each other for resources - but are smart enough to create the fiction of the rule of law.
I'll look more into liberland. Got any good data to start with?
It's a swamp in a small area. Why bother? I wouldn't waste your time. It's an interesting idea, but it's not going to work. Worse, it is probably a joke. I know lots of big names have gotten involved in the project, but it is not the solution.
I tend to agree with you in concept but I'll still look into it for grins sake.
Any definition of Anarchy must include as part of it being how sovereigns interact outside of the structure of a State.
No state is required. After this entire thread, I'm still not sure if you understand that important point or not. There is no "United States of Anarchy." The state, i.e. nation or country, of Anarchy will never exist.
I'm against royals as much as I am fascists and communists. If you are using government to control others, you are a tyrant. I don't care why you are controlling them either.
Humans do not need to be ruled. You may think they do because of your own personal fear, but they do not. Why?
The vast majority of humans are not predators. The predators naturally gravitate towards positions of power and control. Therefore, do not create those positions.
Do not give that small minority the ability to rule. Walk away from their systems. Don't create new ones. Any system of government, no matter what form it is, will eventually be taken over by oligarchs and rulers.
I disagree. The US is supposed to be a government of the people and by the people, voluntarily through representatives to weed out the concept of mob rule and to provide for the protection of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Without that and our fealty to Its principals we have nothing and are unprotected from the real vicious people in this world. Which are the Globalists who think and operate above the law.
That's cute if you really believe it. Setting aside the largest mass genocide of human history for a moment, the USA would have been better off staying as individual nation states. As in Virginia as one country, Maryland another, etc. Even at a "state" level though, it is tyrannical today. Back when the states were formed though, there was far more liberty and far less government.
What you wrote about the USA is a joke. It's a joke on us, or at least the people who know better than believing the lie. Governments routinely ignore documents. The USA documents are no exception. I'm more of a Declaration of Independence guy, not a Bill of Right's guy. Which Bill of Rights is still being honored?
Speaking of "Bills of Rights," you should check out Virginia's Article 13 of their so-called bill of rights. It was written way before the US Consitution too. Keep that in mind when you read the document.
Then realize we have come a VERY long way from that time period. We've gone in the wrong direction away from liberty too. And that's how these things work. No matter how genius the system is, powers consolidate and liberty shrinks over time.
I don't disagree with any of that which is why we need to get back to the constitutional levels of representation. 1:30,000. I won't post the link but you should check out what I wrote on the greatest conspiracy ever perpetrated in the US.
The government gives us a group savings discount so we all don't need to hire private security to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm. That's the idea anyway. And we pay taxes for it.
That's funny. What the government gives you it had to take from someone else.
The Government owns the sovereignty and jurisdiction. Everything it has it took or bought from England, Spain, France, Netherlands or the Natives; to regulate our lives as citizens. You were born with nothing, everything you have is from government protection of your property it lets you keep.
Check how how it was supposed to work:
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@adconner/the-greatest-conspiracy-ever-perpetrated-on-the-united-states-of-america-and-no-one-even-realizes-it
No, thanks anyway. It doesn't matter. The solution does not involve government. Government is force. You cannot have one without putting a gun to someone's head. I understand that to be wrong whether it is written down on paper or not.
True Government is force. Our government in the US at least professes to protect our rights.