how would criminal activity be dealt with in a stateless society?

[tannenj]

sorry if this seems noobish. this is something i've been thinking about recently and i can't really find a good answer in past threads.

i have a libertarian background. i suspect i'm like a lot of 2+2ers in that i find things like welfare, social security, a non-isolationist military strategy, etc. to be offensive. i'm also an atheist and think the government should be completely uninvolved in citizens' lives in a social sense (read: if someone wants to get an abortion or play online poker, the government should [censored] off). this peeves the hell out of me. basically, i support a very minimal government with very minimal taxes.

this stance is extreme compared to the average person's. with that said, i've browsed this forum a bit and i see that a bunch of posters think government should be totally abolished; in comparison to this, my politics stance seems mild.

so, i've been giving some thought to anarchism and reading a bunch of threads. it seems idealistic to me because without at least a minimal form of government, how would we prevent chaos?

i posed this question to nielsio, who i believe is banned from this forum. he responded with several links:

1, 2, 3

the author discusses dros (dispute resolution organizations), to my understanding, independent insurance companies that put some kind of mark on the credit of offenders that will make it difficult/impossible for offenders to get jobs, purchase property, etc.

but this doesn't seem good enough. it seems that many nutjobs wouldn't care less about dros and that this system would be conducive to nutjobs running wild and society becoming chaotic. to me, the dro stuff seems flimsy.

would anarchists say that this point is pessimistic and doesn't give enough credit to human beings?

i understand that these thoughts are probably elementary. all comments welcome.

[plzleenowhammy]

Excellent question. There's really only one way that I think criminal activity could be prevented without the state...

You see, the first thing that would happen is an organization would spring up to handle security in a given region. This organization would hire security personnel to safeguard everyone in the region.

Now, everyone in this region would pay a certain percentage of their income to the security firm in exchange for their protection. If at any time a member or the region was dissatisfied with the provided service they could voice their opinion in open forums but as long as they lived in that region they must pay for their protection. If a member of this region were to be so dissatisfied with the level of service provided by the organization that he or she would feel compelled to stop paying for the security service then the security organization would correctly enter that person's home and demand the money they are owed.

If the person were to still not comply then they will be taken into seclusion by the organization and held for an amount of time that the organization decides upon. If this person were to resist their own detaining then the defenders of the organization will unfortunately have to use their issued tazers, clubs, pepper spray, handcuffs, pistols and shotguns to protect the rest of the region from this miscreant. If the dastardly perpetrator were to resist vehemently then they will be shot by regional security. A pay increase will then be issued to the personnel involved and the people in the region will gladly pay more of their income knowing that they are being protected so valiantly.

Do you see now how security works? People in a region pay for their security and if they do not then they are given harsh sanctions which (unfortunately, of course) include beatings, kidnappings and death. This is the only way to ensure that the inhabitants of the region will have their property protected and their children safeguarded.

Also, the organization will be paid as much as is necessary to ensure safety. Since, you see, rival regions are full of savages who would like nothing more than to destroy our serene region! In order that they may defend us, the organization will defend the region by attacking other regions. The members of our serene region will be more than happy to pay for this attack because the organization will surely only attack those who really really deserve it. If at any time the organization does not have enough employees to successfully attack the violent region in question then it will, at times of great need, require that you (and your children in the most extreme of cases) defend the region by murdering those that wish to destroy it. I know this sounds like a dire situation, friend, but I assure you it is the only way to ensure your safety! If you are worried that you might be punished for committing an attack against a neighboring or far-away region you needn't worry. No legal sanctions will be lodged against you. In fact, the region and all of its inhabitans, will thank you for your fine work and bravery (if only all of the regional members were so brave)!

So, there you have it. My hope for the future. I'm sure that the organizations of different regions will like slightly differently but they will all be the same in nature. They will probably even have similar names... I imagine the organizations would be called something like.. I don't know.. maybe.. Guardians Opposing Violence Territories.. GOVT for short.

[Thug Bubbles]

DRO's always struck me as being contingent on all parties playing along. I see no reason why several entities wouldn't cater to the shrugged off portions of society. Aside from the obvious communication issue between DRO's and respective businesses to curb commerce with criminals (especially local shops), not being able to shop at a Walmart is hardly a deterrent to crime.

Besides, some people really do belong in a 'cage'.

[boracay]

[ QUOTE ]
Excellent question. There's really only one way that I think criminal activity could be prevented without the state...

You see, the first thing that would happen is an organization would spring up to handle security in a given region. This organization would hire security personnel to safeguard everyone in the region.

Now, everyone in this region would pay a certain percentage of their income to the security firm in exchange for their protection. If at any time a member or the region was dissatisfied with the provided service they could voice their opinion in open forums but as long as they lived in that region they must pay for their protection. If a member of this region were to be so dissatisfied with the level of service provided by the organization that he or she would feel compelled to stop paying for the security service then the security organization would correctly enter that person's home and demand the money they are owed.

If the person were to still not comply then they will be taken into seclusion by the organization and held for an amount of time that the organization decides upon. If this person were to resist their own detaining then the defenders of the organization will unfortunately have to use their issued tazers, clubs, pepper spray, handcuffs, pistols and shotguns to protect the rest of the region from this miscreant. If the dastardly perpetrator were to resist vehemently then they will be shot by regional security. A pay increase will then be issued to the personnel involved and the people in the region will gladly pay more of their income knowing that they are being protected so valiantly.

Do you see now how security works? People in a region pay for their security and if they do not then they are given harsh sanctions which (unfortunately, of course) include beatings, kidnappings and death. This is the only way to ensure that the inhabitants of the region will have their property protected and their children safeguarded.

Also, the organization will be paid as much as is necessary to ensure safety. Since, you see, rival regions are full of savages who would like nothing more than to destroy our serene region! In order that they may defend us, the organization will defend the region by attacking other regions. The members of our serene region will be more than happy to pay for this attack because the organization will surely only attack those who really really deserve it. If at any time the organization does not have enough employees to successfully attack the violent region in question then it will, at times of great need, require that you (and your children in the most extreme of cases) defend the region by murdering those that wish to destroy it. I know this sounds like a dire situation, friend, but I assure you it is the only way to ensure your safety! If you are worried that you might be punished for committing an attack against a neighboring or far-away region you needn't worry. No legal sanctions will be lodged against you. In fact, the region and all of its inhabitans, will thank you for your fine work and bravery (if only all of the regional members were so brave)!

So, there you have it. My hope for the future. I'm sure that the organizations of different regions will like slightly differently but they will all be the same in nature. They will probably even have similar names... I imagine the organizations would be called something like.. I don't know.. maybe.. Guardians Opposing Violence Territories.. GOVT for short.

[/ QUOTE ]

= Mafia. Mafia Is Biggest Business in Italy

[wtfsvi]

If freedom necessariy leads to chaos, then chaos it is. I'm not entitled to order at the expense of other people's freedom. Of course I hope that chaos in the sense you mean it would not ensue, and at the very least not last.

edit: But you really underestimate how powerful non-violent sanctions can be. If nobody wants to deal with you, you have nowhere to live, nothing to eat, noone to protect you even though everyone hates you, so on. If your irrational criminal doesn't care about that, he's going to have a tough life and die young.

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
If freedom necessariy leads to chaos, then chaos it is. I'm not entitled to order at the expense of other people's freedom. Of course I hope that chaos in the sense you mean it would not ensue, and at the very least not last.

edit: But you really underestimate how powerful non-violent sanctions can be. If nobody wants to deal with you, you have nowhere to live, nothing to eat, noone to protect you even though everyone hates you, so on. If your irrational criminal doesn't care about that, he's going to have a tough life and die young.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like this was touched upon in the AS thread, but I'm still not completely clear on it. In a stateless society, say these "sanctions" were imposed on the individual and he/she felt it was necessary to take violent means to get what they want, would it be allowable for a violent response to that individual?

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like this was touched upon in the AS thread, but I'm still not completely clear on it. In a stateless society, say these "sanctions" were imposed on the individual and he/she felt it was necessary to take violent means to get what they want, would it be allowable for a violent response to that individual?

[/ QUOTE ] Yes, responding violently to violence has to be acceptable.

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I feel like this was touched upon in the AS thread, but I'm still not completely clear on it. In a stateless society, say these "sanctions" were imposed on the individual and he/she felt it was necessary to take violent means to get what they want, would it be allowable for a violent response to that individual?

[/ QUOTE ] Yes, responding violently to violence has to be acceptable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I believe I agree with this then, because the threat of violence upon the criminal if he were to become violent would also act as a deterrant to this sort of behavior.

Hmmm, how do you see people with dangerous mental disorders being handled? Would you just have to let the person be until he did some sort of harm or would there be some sort of social mechanism in place to determine that the person was a threat and needed to be placed in some sort of care facility?

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I feel like this was touched upon in the AS thread, but I'm still not completely clear on it. In a stateless society, say these "sanctions" were imposed on the individual and he/she felt it was necessary to take violent means to get what they want, would it be allowable for a violent response to that individual?

[/ QUOTE ] Yes, responding violently to violence has to be acceptable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I believe I agree with this then, because the threat of violence upon the criminal if he were to become violent would also act as a deterrant to this sort of behavior.

Hmmm, how do you see people with dangerous mental disorders being handled? Would you just have to let the person be until he did some sort of harm or would there be some sort of social mechanism in place to determine that the person was a threat and needed to be placed in some sort of care facility?

[/ QUOTE ] It's a tough question. If people are nice enough to want to spend some resources on helping him, I think it would be ok to talk with the person and try to make him see that it would be in his best interest to agree to submit himself to such a facility. It's very problematic, though. Norms would have to develop concerning how long you could submit yourself. It wouldn't be reasonable that I signed a paper saying you can lock me away for the rest of my life, and then you could do that even if I later changed my mind.

Of course, if he refuses, I think we have to leave him be and not act violently against him as long as he is not acting violently himself.

[lozen]

Dont you feel if you elimnated welfare crime would also increase?