Você está na página 1de 6

Fifty things to do NOW

Declaration of Separation
The Aristocracy of Action
The Two Realms
[
THE TWO REALMS
Introduction
When thinking about the future of human society and the conflict between
strong states and strong individuals the possible outcomes we think
about tend
to be extremes. Either the states rule completely, or the individual
does.
state,

This article presents a third option - The Two Realms. One for the
the other for the individual.

strong
lead

The Stage
At opposite ends of the spectrum we have the strong state and the strong
individual. I use the word strong to emphasize the position taken. A
state has the objective to stay strong. That means it mainly follows any
to justify its power and control.

It is important to see that the main definition and the basic


justification of
the state is the monopoly of violence over a certain territory and all
people living in that territory. This monopoly is the intellectual
reason why
to have a state, and this monopoly is also the source of anything any
state
can do.
There is no taxation without the monopoly of violence, there is no
police,

justice system, parliaments, etc without the centralized control of


violence.
The states objective is always maintaining a monopoly of violence.
- and

Everything that questions that monopoly is a danger to the state itself

a danger to those people that are part of the state apparatus:


Politicians,
bureaucrats, public services employees (police, firemen, part of the
health
industry).
On the other side of the spectrum we have the strong individual. By
definition
the strong individual seeks to rule himself. He/She claims a monopoly of
violence over himself by himself. As soon as a person refuses to accept
the
exclusive monopoly of the state on the exercise of violence, that person
turns
into a strong individual.

In todays society we have several groups of strong individuals, most of


them

calling themselves anarchists of some kind. But there are others, such

as

radical religious groups, that do not accept the state as the sole

ruler.
One of those groups I would like to call libertarian. For the sake of

this

discussion, we will state that libertarian groups consist of strong


individuals that seek freedom of person, communication, commerce and
lifestyle. This categorization is not an attempt to define a party or an
organization, but to classify a group of individuals.
There is a third group to talk about: The people.
We will call the vast majority of humans on state territory The
people.

These are individuals not employed by the state and not opposing the

monopoly

of violence. Most of The people are just fine with the existence of

the
they
the

state, taxes, welfare, etc. They do not oppose the status quo. Certainly
have details to complain about, but they do not question the concept of
state itself.
For a large number of people the state really brings great advantages.

Just

imagine that 40% of all Germans get 50% or more of their income through

state

wealth redistribution. That includes not only welfare recipients or


government
officials but also construction industry, health care industry and
others.
by

The people and the state build some kind of power exchange market formed

legislative bodies, unions, NGOs etc. These are mainly focused on


protecting
the status quo, even if painting it in different colors each other year.
this

The people are subject to the state. The desire of the state to maintain

subjugation is the reason for the states desire for the monopoly of
violence.
There is no state without the people, but there are people without the
state.
Utopia

It is important to realize that most people do not oppose libertarian

because they think that it is morally corrupt. The main reason for
opposition
is simply fear. Fear to leave the status quo without knowing how things
would
work out.
Many of the people are interested in experimenting with libertarian
concepts,
at least those people that are used to being self-responsible in the
market

place.
Some examples of potential libertarians are freelancers, consultants,

the self

employed and executives of Small/Medium Sized Enterprises (SME).


The Two Realms
When thinking about the future of society one of the central questions
is

this:
Can those three groups coexist on the same territory?
It is clear that the state and The people can co-exist as The people

are
few

essential for the existence of the state. But what happens if you add a
thousand strong individuals?

The standard answer is that the state will try to suppress these
individuals;
that the only way for the strong individual to live freely is to
separate from
the state and The people and to find territory that is not controlled by
a
monopolist of power.
The arguments for this conclusion are convincing: The state cannot
accept the
questioning of its authority or its monopoly on violence. Any
disobedience and
dissent is opposing the justification of the state and therefore a
threat to
its existence. Questioning endangers the states monopoly.
On the other hand the exercise of violence against political enemies is
a

danger to the state itself. We can see from history that oppression has

often

led to an uprising of The people against the state apparatus. The


destruction
of several socialist or autocratic regimes in recent history shows that
open
oppression can lead to the people rethinking their view on the current
political system. (Never has this been a threat to the concept of the
strong
state itself but a threat only to the current implementation and to the
people
currently in positions of power.)
may

If the state is too harsh in its defense against strong individuals this
cause the agents of the state to threaten the states existence.

But this is not the only threat the state has to keep in mind. Its
merely the
most extreme.
able

More likely is the radicalization of the strong individuals if they are


to organize themselves to follow their common objectives.

Since strong individuals tend to be well educated, well funded and


creative,

they can be a strong enemy. Especially their creativity and their


independence
from the restrictions of state laws and rules of conduct. All of this
makes
them a difficult adversary to fight. Strong individuals would very
likely
target the central infrastructure, instruments and people that hold the
state
together.
The state has much to lose in such a battle.
An alternative could be the concept of two realms. If a strong state

and a

strong individual try to stay out of each others realm it is less


likely that
a bloody conflict might arise.
The Two Realms Explored
Let us examine what those realms could be, how they can co-exist in
parallel

and where they would likely clash.


The states realm is where the state rules exclusively and where the

people

are ruled.
This will be public places, public transportation, public welfare,

public

health care, and the states justice system, including courts, police

and

prisons. Furthermore all activities taking place in any of these areas

are in

the states realm and solely under its control.


We call this The first realm.
The other realm would consist of privately owned space, such as certain

shops

and houses, as well as certain communication systems that already exist.

This

is the realm of the strong individuals, which we will call The second

realm.
Both of these realms would have their own economic and monetary system

and

would both try to stay out of each others business.


Examples of separate territories within one nation state already exist.

Just

think about those quarters that the police wont enter at night. What is
crucial for such a concept to succeed is that both realms try to stay
out of

each others business as much as possible. Both realms need to be as

separate

as possible. This, first and foremost, means that the intersections of

both

economic and money systems need to be avoided as much as possible.


Working in the realm of the strong individuals? Dont use the states

banking

system to conduct transactions.


Working in the realm of the state? Dont use the strong individuals

money

system to launder your proceeds.


Separating the realms is crucial. But also having physical space to

meet,
no

trade, exchange, follow your lifestyle. Coffee shops, restaurants, free


houses that are exclusively for the use of strong individuals. There is
substitute for sitting together to cooperate and collaborate.

And these dedicated physical spaces build bridges for effective


commerce. What
about settling your transactions by exchanging real physical gold (or
whatever
medium of exchange you prefer)?
Or physically delivering goods to your customer?
Those free zones dont have to be huge and protected by gunmen. Any

coffee

shop run by a strong individual can become such a place.


Immigrant communities are an example for effective working structures of

this

kind.

and

Furthermore the realm of the strong individuals consists of unrestricted


digital communication systems. Even today we already have the means to
exchange any data freely, unregulated and anonymously. Systems like Tor
I2P are only the better known ones. The states have long realized that

they

will not be able to control those advanced communication systems. This

is why

they focus mostly on wide spread The people technology like Short
Messaging
Service, telephone, client-server VoIP, standard email, web surfing and
so on.
When putting the picture together, we soon notice that these two realms
cannot

be completely separate. For a long while the second realm will be too

small to

be economically sustainable. People that work in the second realm must

still

go shopping at a supermarket in the first realm. But the volume of


cross-realm
commerce can be massively reduced if there are physical bridgeheads that
allow
for physical commerce. The cost of transactions would be greatly
reduced,
barter and the enforcement of contracts would become easier etc.
But we also have to admit that there is a big problem attached to those
physical bridgeheads - the coffee shops, free houses and rural
communities
where strong individuals connect. We would need to come into the light.
Many
of us are too paranoid to do so. The state could send agents that would
get to
know our faces.
protect

This is a very valid counter argument. But we already know ways to

ourselves. Separation of physical identity, communication identity,

physical

proxies, etc already exist. And such things existed before and have been
successfully used before by other underground movements that were much
more a

the
dont

target than we are currently or may ever be.


End notes
We often discuss the possibilities of forming new states:- To colonize
seas, the solar system or to take over islands to form new societies. I

want to wait that long. Waiting for a better world, a perfect place,
turns the
place into Utopia. Reality works by dreaming big dreams but building
with
bricks and mortar.
my
have a
are

Do not get me wrong, - I also have these big dreams. I look forward to
personal floating platform on the high seas. But today I would like to
glimpse of this Utopia in my real life. We have so many tools that we
already a power by ourselves.

believe

But to become more effective, to implement more of our dreams today, I


we need to claim our realm.

]
2010 The Free and Unashamed
Hosted by anarplex.net, back to files

Você também pode gostar