a(n) "not, without"+ acro "extremity, topmost" + archy "ruler, leader, authority"
The state of a society being without a topmost or monopoly authority or an authoritative governing body.
Yes, I just made up a word for the state of almost anarchy! let me explain myself if I may.
Anarchism aims to completely dissolve authority and hierarchy in society. With the conditions of order and chaos in the world, anarchism relies on free association to bring order to society. The order which keeps society away from chaos in a State is authority over the use of force. This force can be to establish the rule of law and when its force demands too much order people may fall out to chaos and when it's force is not powerful enough people will make chaos. States or governments and their peoples seek to find this balance of order in chaos in political systems analogous to the spectrum of tyranny and freedom. Anarchism as a political ideal is when free-association without a State can counterbalance total chaos and total order.
What is the optimal order/chaos preference of a society and can it reach it's maximal preference to each of its citizens?
What if Anacroarchy was in practice a system of a union of governments which only agreed upon the most dire things in order to maintain their own order? If every individual at the age of suffrage was a citizen free to choose citizenship in any government they preferred how would society look?
Their would be no government monopolizing authority, the use of force, or law in property they didn't rightfully claim, nor citizens under another authority.
There would be governments which would be authority over citizens who chose to belong in them, not over the majority or voted in power-heads. Those authorities would then come together and form Unions/Federations/Pacts. Contrast this with States or federations (hierarchy of States) and authorities based on territorial monopolies. States and their monopolies control the entirety of populations in their territorial 'claims' (aka Property/Land). Perhaps instead of the vast population voting to choose an authoritarian to govern the monopoly of the state for a temporary time over a territory we can subscribe to the government we choose to belong to. Why should I have to argue with my 'vote' to people in society to bring about the types of laws and services I align myself with.
...and I'll give you my own take on this question.
In my opinion in the current state of affairs, I want their to be no or are as little government as possible as the State is a monopoly which I think is unjust mostly, but also provides negative or misaligned outcomes and unintended consequences.
However, If i lived in an Anacroarchy I would be okay with my government servicing basic functions like a general health-plan for emergencies, guarantees for education with credits, hiring of professional teachers so all my fellow citizens are trained in personal defense, firearms, emergency care, finances, firefighting, personal wellness/therapy etc. and would also add public funds to "good" bounties which would award open-source projects. My government would not have a standing military, and minimally hire full time positions, basically hiring services on an annual basis, which would enter us into transportation networks, telecom networks, arbitration networks, and a parks and nature network. We would be as accommodating as possible to refugee populations and our citizenship would be open for immigration, and may only de-citizenship people who violate peoples person or property. We would have no enforcement of Intellectual property, but would allow citizens to hold IP with other agency or governments. We'd have a relatively free-marketed approach but ensure service packages would cover our citizens human needs, and try to not cover human wants... to the best of our human ability. For example of one thing between need and want would be to house as many of our citizens in 'earthship' principal structures, minimizing necessity on any dependency resource.
Exemplified
If there are 100 people living: 5 are nationalists (N), 10 are libertarians (L), 10 are greens (G), 15 are socialists (S), 30 are social-democrats (D), 30 are social-conservatives (C). The form of government Pact between the N-L-G-S-D can be the least common denominator as rule of law. Each government must not aggress another; recognize the other governments citizenry and their 'claims'/property/territory; Establish a means to dispute conflicts. These functions don't need monopolization of authority, but can be a pact signed, verified and crosschecked by each government within the pact. Each authority can therefore create it's own rule of law, regulation, taxation and support it's citizenry in whichever means it finds optimal or desired. Lets presume the governments of N-D-C share a common function they all find optimal lets say as a standing military they'd create a Union of Defense. The governments of G-S-D find it optimal to have the Union of Universal Healthcare, and the N-C have a Union of National Healthcare. Among the policies of each would differ and the contentious issue of abortion would be defined to law, supported or not, and funded by each government as it pleased. Immigration would be a function of allowance of each government to allow in visitors or persons which they hold liability for, and or integrate or grant citizenry to. Imagine, The Pact Standards of Tourist and Visitors - a guideline and process followed by the L-G-S-D-C. A National Parks Service could be a Public organization which receives it's funding by the N-G-S-D-C governments and when a L citizen wishes to enter they may and pay the park fee to this organization, while the government funding provides it free or subsidized for the citizens of member governments.
In conclusion, Anacroarchy seems a good way to balance the order and chaos, the tyranny and freedom in society by creating competing governance. The umbrella of authority can be chosen by the citizen which highlights their optimal preference. If the optimal preference of any group of peoples can be codified into an authority which then can be included into a network of authorities governance will be based on a market of ideas. The market of ideas which is represented by active citizens joining or leaving governments. This flexibility to allow a citizen to subscribe to a government can be a stable framework to organize the demos, the majority yet maintain the minority sovereignty and govern more equitably.
We all in society agree for the most part we can hold an election to determine our rule-makers over a certain time period. Yet the loosing party or minority for the most part doesn't crusade or denounce the authority for they would wield its power had they won. Perhaps all in society can agree for the most part we can belong to our own governments of choice to determine our rules and the necessary rules to function between governments can be managed through governments co-operation with each other which need not be more than acknowledgment of each other to function as an authority unto their citizenry.
If you think this is great, silly, or whatever leave a comment, tell me your subscription based ideal government.
I hope at the least it was a little thought provoking
Peace from Yaqovia!
#Anarchism #Anarchy #Polycentric #Law #governance #government #alternative #showerthoughts
