3) Anarchy is not the same as openness. Openness says I demand full insight into what my government is doing. If not me personally, then somebody I elected or appointed. Anarchy says any type of secret is bad and open air always beats secrets. Governments can't function without secrets -- even your local small town has to have secret meetings to discuss personnel issues and such. Wikileaks is, to my mind, opposed to this cornerstone. That's anarchy.
Some crypto-anarchists and agorists would like to have a few words with you.
Hey I'm a systems guy -- technology systems and people systems. If you have a good idea for how a system of people would work to govern themselves, I'm game.
Is there an example -- in the entire history of the planet -- of a government which had no need for secrecy? Sounds cool if it would work.
Is there an example -- in the entire history of the planet -- of a government which had no need for secrecy? Sounds cool if it would work.
Secrecy? Those anarchists care about secrecy so they can stop the government from finding about their economic activities.
They don't care about if government have secrets or not, just that the government can't spy on their black market activities.(Which could be anything from selling pets to lawn mowing, and drugs)
If you want technologies, a lot of techno-libertarians are into http://bitcoin.org cryto-currency. For credit and reputation management, some have looked into complementary systems like Ripple.
As far as social system? I prefer free markets and voluntary systems due to my libertarian leaning. However, I don't know if they're effective or have flaws.
All I do know is flaws that exists in the government, especially the democratic system of government, in addition to my ethical dislike about the nature of governments.
Really, in my original reply, I am just pointing out how anarchy hate secrecy is laughable.
FYI, Iceland was some kind of anarchy between 930 and 1262. Which apparently lead to a lot of feuds.
I think it's important to what kind of information governments need to keep secret and what kind they keep secret. Judging by Wikileaks content this seems to be information about (a) wars of aggression (defensive wars apparently need less secrets) (b) providing unfair advantages to private companies (I think ACTA counts here) (c) things they shouldn't allow (such as misbehaving personnel) (d) censorship.
So, we need to ask: does our perfect, imaginary, peaceful state need to keep anything secret from its own citizens? I think no.
FYI, Iceland was some kind of anarchy between 930 and 1262. Which apparently lead to a lot of feuds.
With the introduction of a tax and Christianity, it has apparently lead to a captive market. This captive market unraveled the icelandic system since there is less accountability and inability to switch.
Kowloon Walled City was essentially lawless, not set up as an anarchy, but becoming one by chance. Controlled anarchy seems like a strange idea, but maybe that's what we need. Personally, I'm a fan of zenarchy, the belief that perfect anarchy follows general enlightenment. It's both joke and serious theory.
Some crypto-anarchists and agorists would like to have a few words with you.