Anarchist Bibliography, please? (was Re: Deconstructing an Institutional Slander...)

[nonomos@mail.com (No)]

Stirner has opened my eyes on quite a few levels, you could categorize
his book under individualistic anarchism (though categories seem
irrelevant).

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own

This text has helped me and some others, trying to not drift off in
endless cynicism and nihilism:

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-lamborn-wilson-the-new-nihilism

On 08/04/2016 11:37 PM, jim bell wrote:
>
>
> *From:* Steve Kinney <admin@pilobilus.net>
>
> On 08/04/2016 03:00 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote:
> >> I asked Steve some suggestions in private, but it's better to ask
> >> publicly, so more people can profit the clues.  Oh, you know, he
> >> loves books, uses cute emoticons and makes oink oink.  He's a good
> >> reference for me, hahaha!!  ;)
>
> >When dredging the Internet for information, I am sure you won't have
> >much trouble picking out the State sponsored anarchist literature and
> >pseudo-radical propaganda fronts: 
>
>
> I hope people will forgive me for tooting my own horn.  I was a
> minarchist Libertarian in 1994,
> not an anarchist Libertarian.  But it wasn't because I somehow wanted
> to keep around some
> minimal government.  Rather, it was because I couldn't figure out a
> logically-consistent method'
> to entirely get rid of those last vestiges of government.  Lacking
> such an plausible method,
> I chose the intellectually-honest route of accepting (at the time)
> that some residual government
> would be necessary.
>
> While not specifically aware of David Friedman's (son of famous
> economist Milton Friedman)
> "Hard Problem"
>  http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/04/will_david_frie.html   ,
> from his 
> book, "The Machinery of Freedom" (1973; revised in 1989; again 2014),
>  I was effectively
> aware of the  same barrier, and like Friedman, I could not see any
> solution.  Anarchy, I 
> concluded, was impractical, and unachievable. 
>
> It's a good thing that I wasn't aware of Friedman's "Hard Problem", or
> the idea it was "hard".
> In January 1995 I because to contemplate the idea that turned into my
> "Assassination
> Politics" essay.   https://cryptome.org/ap.htm  
>
>   I wasn't intending to solve that problem:  Rather, I was trying to
> figure out how
> an otherwise-powerless public could defend itself from bad acts,
> mostly from government
> employees.  I realized that to combine the contributions of anonymous
> individuals,  allows
> that public can deter and prevent those bad acts.  I further realized
> that this system would
> be extremely economical, allowing (for instance) the region known as
> "America" to defend
> itself, not merely from external threats, but also internal crime,
> probably for a total cost of 
> under $1 billion per year, far less than the $600 billion in defense
> spending currently done.
>
> A simplistic, initial analysis (which I initially assumed, even before
> I wrote the first part of the
> AP essay) was that AP would simply fix government.  But the ultimate
> "fix" was actually far
> more powerful than I'd initially realized, not merely fixing
> governments, but destroying all
> governments, and thus protecting an anarchist or minarchist region
> from threatening 
> neighbors.
>
> Put simply, I solved David Friedman's "Hard Problem".  I haven't yet
> seen the 2014 revision
> of his book, Machinery of Freedom, to see if he has acknowledged this
> yet.    I think it would
> be extraordinarily strange if he doesn't do so:  After all, ostensibly
> we are on the same side
> of this matter.  He advocates a zero-government solution:  Why
> wouldn't he cite a proof
> that a zero-government solution is actually possible, contrary to his
> apparent previous
> opinion?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Machinery_of_Freedom 
>
> But in effect, I think I was quite correct, pre-1995, for me  to
> believe that anarchy was
>  impractical.   I don't know how people who labelled themselves as
> 'anarchists'  resolved
> the apparent contradiction.  Were they aware that anarchy wasn't
> stable?  (At least not
> absent my 1995 invention, AP).   Most likely I think they were simply
> unaware that anarchy
> wasn't going to be stable.  Or, perhaps they assumed that then-future
> events would somehow
> solve the problem.  As, ultimately, they did, but it didn't have to be
> that way.  I, virtually by
> accident, solved that problem.  But things could have been very different.
>
>                 Jim Bell
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160805/22fe3a78/attachment.html>