- Travel: The anarchist polity's inhabitants aren't technically citizens of any country. They have no passports, therefore they can't travel overseas.
- Natural Resources: Their sovereignty couldn't be recognized internationally, so they wouldn't have an Exclusive Economic Zone. Their waters would be considered international waters: The Naval Militia would have to work full-time swatting foreign fishing boats off their turf... And they'd be regarded as pirates by the international community.
- Trade: They couldn't enter into trade agreements, since there's nobody to sign'em. It's quite likely that their goods would be tariffed outta the roof upon export, since no better status can be negotiated.
- Diplomacy: They couldn't have it either, since nobody has the ability to present ambassadors, and no negotiator is in a position to promise (and deliver) worth a damn (not actually representing anybody)
- International Law: They wouldn't get an UN seat and they wouldn't exist under international law: This would make it difficult to lobby for their interests.
- Could an anarchic society manage to survive without any of those things? Would it be worth the effort?
- Can a powerless legal fiction of a government be established without it growing into an actual government?
- Assuming society is otherwise libertarian and socialistic (and the government is powerless in practice), would it still be an anarchic society?
edited 30th Dec '11 5:43:58 AM by SavageHeathen
- They establish a ineffectual pseudo-government that issues passports and signs trade deals: It'd require the various unions, associations and communes across the territory to send delegates to some sorta committee.
- They forego diplomacy and solve the passports and trade issues through the UN. It'd give'em a whole lotta work to acommodate a buncha anarchists, but it could be managed. Presumably it'd involve building some sort of representative association, requiring the various communities in the anarchist territory to send representatives somewhere and build a committee of some sort.
- A wholly new set of rules would be needed for international relations with anarchist communities: This option is too impractical: The anarchists have no way to give input on those without representation, and States might be unwilling to get into all that tedious paperwork. It's quite likely that the new framework would involve options A or B.
- Travel: Unions, cooperatives and so on could make individual agreements with other states, and issue travel certificates or something like that to their members. They could even gather together and make multi-cooperative agreements, if they wanted to.
- Natural Resources: That's not different from what any novel state would have to face. Yeah, getting other states to recognize the anarchistic commune's sovereignty claims would be difficult, sure, but the fact that it is "stateless" is not the issue here.
- Trade: Same as for travel. Unions can deal with states on their own, or, if they prefer, they can associate and try to obtain a better agreement.
- Diplomacy: Same as above. Individual groups could certainly send representatives abroad. Or they could nominate the same representative, in order to give her/him more contractual power.
know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.
edited 30th Dec '11 6:40:08 AM by MajorTom
edited 30th Dec '11 6:49:10 AM by SavageHeathen
edited 30th Dec '11 7:14:43 AM by SavageHeathen
edited 30th Dec '11 7:15:18 AM by MajorTom
edited 30th Dec '11 7:45:37 AM by stripesthezebra
edited 30th Dec '11 8:25:25 AM by CaissasDeathAngel
edited 30th Dec '11 10:42:35 AM by RadicalTaoist
edited 30th Dec '11 11:09:17 AM by breadloaf
- that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
- that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
- that of carrying arms openly;
- that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
edited 30th Dec '11 11:23:55 AM by breadloaf