Another fundamental problem with anarcho-capitalism, voluntarism, etc., in my opinion, is that it does not address the current (cultural) problem of unproductive institutions — which may not only be state institutions, but also megacorps or simply overgrown communities of any kind.

"Open source plays no fundamental role in anarcho-capitalism and other liberal movements" I see this all the time in the inability of the Bitcoin community to grapple with some of the thorny issues surrounding the fact that Bitcoin development is, fundamentally, an open-source project... And like any open-source project, the development winds up being sort of "anarcho-communist" in practice. We all get together, "do as each according to our ability", and arrive at a consensus on decisions. Nobody "owns" this. It's Zucotti Park in cyberspace. Bitcoin _itself_ on the other hand is the most real manifestation of an anarcho-capitalist economic system that was ever invented. Bitcoiners who don't understand this dialectic wind up getting forced into this sort of "siege mentality", who's going to "win?" idea.

I'm not talking about creating any limitations, but rather about what I feel is missing in the current ancap framework, and which would complement it in such a way as to provide answers even to people who are genuinely concerned about power concentration and institutional capture. Through the recognition that markets alone don't dissolve the cultural and social dynamics that allow manipulative institutions to flourish.

Do you know Ivan Illich? I think this man came up with theories that, when combined with ancap or voluntarism, could work very well (and not going in direction of communism) "The vernacular domain. Illich contrasts the commodified, professionalized world with the "vernacular"—modes of living, producing, and relating that exist outside market exchange and institutional management. Vernacular competence is learned informally, practiced in common, and adapted to local conditions. It represents the autonomous substrate of human capability that institutions systematically erode."

I'm thinking about how it could work, I call it "anarcho-convivialism"

anarch-convivialism.md · by tree.fail

Anarcho-Convivialism

Bitcoin, Nostr and other useful open-source software can be defined as "convivial" technology

I love Illich, I'm going to give a talk about digital conviviality in January. I only learned about you this morning, but would you come on @Thank God For Nostr Podcast?

yes this is the guy who makes the client I use #coracle, you should go on his podcast 😁

Not familiar, but I'll check it out.. .thanks!

Well there's always the classic "Exit, voice and loyalty", which works whether we're talking about corporations or governments.... One thing that irks me sometimes about general "libertarian" discourse is how much they (we?) seem to be invested in defending the status quo of Giant Megacorporations, especially in the social media space, because they're trying to stand up the other side of the argument from overzealous regulators like we saw in the Biden admin. It's like dude, Elon Musk isn't the "Howard Roark"-ian figure you're projecting onto him. There he was, lined up behind Il Duce with all the other moguls at the inauguration. I get that "exit" can be tough when it comes to providers of physical things like Amazon, etc. But it should be easier to Kill your Twitter than it seems to be for most people.

Oh, thank you very much for the offer, it's an honor! :) But I must politely decline, public speaking in podcasts and at conferences is not for me, but maybe that will change in future when I finish my anarcho-convivial study! btw, Illich was a genius. His ideas answered many of my philosophical questions. I am not surprised that he is not so well known, that we do not learn about him in schools - because he predicted very well where today's "democracies" are headed and that its irreparable.

The missing piece for me is recognizing that these aren't just corporations or governments, but *any* manipulative institutions that actively destroy our capacity for autonomous action. Market and exit alone cannot dissolve this cultural and social dynamics. I think we need both exit AND the cultural/philosophical framework to understand why we're exiting - building the consciousness that lets us recognize manipulative institutions for what they are, so we stop reproducing the same patterns. Something like we doing here, put put it into words which can spread :)

I agree, he really cuts through a lot of the left/right tribalism too