The idea of true anarchy is an attractive one to many - despite the propaganda that claims that anarchy is simply a chaotic and dangerous situation, the reality is that it simply means 'no rulers'. Having no rulers is a REQUIREMENT for balance and thus also world peace, since being remotely controlled by others is inherently disturbing to internal peace! Steemit/Steem's ideological roots in anarcho-capitalism automatically wins points with many of us, but can it be evolved to be more supportive of anarchy than it is already?
Anarchy leads to world peace? What about the smashed shop windows and burning car tires?
Firstly, I am not 'an anarchist' - for several reasons, not least because I know that I am a co-creator of reality and I must remain as open as possible in my definitions of myself to be truly free. I engineer software, but I am not defined BY that and I do not internally define myself as a software engineer. This is more than just semantics since by our definitions we are either opening or closing both our minds and our destiny.
I am clear that anarchist values are good ones, for a very simple reason which is based on an equation and understanding:
Balance = No part or aspect is overpowering any other.
This simplicity is key and is evidenced all around us, yet is not commonly appreciated by humans currently.
Balance produces peaceful interactions that feel good and that create optimal outcomes for all involved. Therefore, balance is essential for our survival and enjoyment of life. The idea of 'Rulers' controlling the actions of others is inherently out of balance.
The biggest challenge we face in creating true and deep balance is that our minds have commonly disconnected from our feelings and so both are now out of balance and they cannot come into balance until we heal internally. This is a reality that is far from imbalanced people's minds, since the emotions that would guide them to this realisation are being denied habitually. The result has been that many hold thoughts that are psychopathic and lacking in an emotional wisdom and compassion - plus many also hold emotions that are out of balance, since they lack the guidance from balanced thought. Therefore, we see many who yearn for freedom but are unaware of how to cause it in their lives and thus their unbalanced emotions and thoughts 'act out' in a variety of forms - including physical acts of destruction and through to less obvious and subtle acts which take many forms.
In a world that is almost totally controlled financially by those who are without a deeply felt loving intention, it is not surprising that any option for breaking free from that control will be taken and one obvious option is to release some anger by smashing some shop windows. Shops are the front line of the capitalist system that seeks to always empower the minority of alleged 'winners', with no inherent care for (or even respect for) anyone else - they don't fight back, so they are easy targets.
Is Anarcho-capitalism an Oxymoron?
An oxymoron is created where the existence of a thing is self contradictory and reveals a paradox. In other words, the 'thing' or idea contains elements which contradict each other and which when we look into it more deeply, we learn powerful truths.
Why do I suggest that maybe Anarchism and Capitalism are contradictory and not complimentary?
Well, capitalism is a way of living which involves private ownership of resources on Earth and also the use of those resources to for personal 'profit'. Inherent in that, therefore, is the potential for empire building, control and the building up of power. Each individual has an inherent amount of power and there is no natural division of power among people that involves resources, therefore capitalist division of resources is unnatural, which is to say it requires a created structure to support it. Currently, that structure is government, facilitated by money - though that could change. People appear to have more power than others mostly only because the others have given their power to them - either knowingly or unconsciously.
Automatically then, capitalism introduces imbalances of several forms, not least that resources are not distributed evenly under a capitalist ideology and, in fact, their distribution is primarily based on the ability of the individuals involved to adapt or exploit the system that manages the entire situation - aka government. Fundamentally, this form of capitalism is flawed in the sense that it is imbalanced and thus can never result in world peace.
"It is not that world peace is impossible, but that capitalism is pervasive and capitalism prevents world peace."
So does Anarchy introduce a balance point that can fix capitalism?
Many claim that anarcho-capitalism is the only fair way to live - but let's not forget that those who support other ideologies also claim the same thing! Just like world religions who claim to be 'the correct religion', the various ideologies cannot all be correct!
The removal of rulers (aka anarchism) does increase balance in a social system, I have no doubt of that - since conflicts can be resolved by the individuals involved and that empowers the individuals to learn and be motivated to continue to learn, rather than always delegating their own destiny to a hierarchy of 'elected individuals'.
"What value does an elected individual have if those who elected them don't have the lived experience needed to make wise decisions, since they themselves don't even make the decisions in their own lives?"
However, there is no way around the problem of the capitalism involved in anarcho-capitalism. Even without rulers, the inherent idea that some will have more than others due to ... * insert justification here * - will always result in imbalance and an undercurrent feeling of dis-satisfaction from those who have less.
How does this play out in Steemit's Architecture?
Steemit is excellent in many ways and genius in many ways too. Besides it's delivery of an evolution to online interactions, it also helps us to explore the dynamics of economic systems in direct and practical ways. One such exploration that is obvious and useful is that of 'how do I get more followers and higher payouts?'. It becomes obvious that since Steemit allows those with higher resources to, in turn, boost ideas and content within the system - it is also true that those with the most resources will be able to promote ideas that keeps them in a position of having the most resources and they can even (via downvoting) suppress the ideas that might result in them losing resources - even when those ideas might also result in us collectively moving towards balance and even world peace!
Those with more money outside of Steemit are inherently helped by the rules of the system to gain more money, followers and resources - so there is not much of an inherent balancing mechanism within the system as a whole, but there is to SOME extent! It IS possible for the diligent among us to gain Steem Power and thus resources just through our own excellence and dedication/creativity.
So we have a kind of ideological standoff - where freedom loving anarchists face off with power seeking capitalists and they seek to come to internal and external agreement about how to play nicely. And here's the kicker...
Real anarchism seeks balance and real capitalism really seeks oligarchy.
Oligarchy is essentially 'rule by a small group' - so where democracy is allegedly 'rule by the majority' and commonly involves voting using equally weighted votes, oligarchy is the result of a pooling of power in the hands of the few - pretty much as occurs in Steemit due to the vote weighting mechanisms.
Anyone who is truly invested in capitalism can get caught up in the fear and neurotic thinking that turns 'business men' into psychopathic money obsessives who even after amassing billions will continue to only focus on getting ever more money. Money is only really a symbolic reflection of 'power' and so in truth, a capitalist is a power hunter and the ultimate extension of such hunting is to the the apex predator of the money/power world - an oligarch.
I am not aware of any mechanisms within Steemit that prevent total oligarchic domination, since if individuals have trillions of dollars, they can literally by up the top spots on all the hot lists and trending lists - thus also receive the majority of the payout pool, resulting in everyone else being left only with the crumbs from the system.
Or am I mistaken? I don't claim to know all the fine points of the algorithms involved in Steem - is there a design feature that prevents oligarchic domination?
The future of Steemit
In my recent SWOT analysis of Steemit I started looking at the future of the platform from the perspective of potential threats and opportunities and this is very much connected to the dynamics discussed in today's post here.
Our technology is only ever a reflection of our internal reality and so it follows that our websites will evolve along with us and so we need to make the decisions that shape our outer realities. In that sense, all of this comes down to one thing only - WHAT DO YOU WANT IN LIFE?
I recently watched the original creator of Steemit (
Got Comments? Leave Them In The Comments Section Below
Do you have any inspired comments on this age old debate? I'd love to hear them - thanks!
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Steemit T-shirts, Hoodies and Many Other Steemit Inspired Products are On Sale Now
Buy your "Steemit, Dreamit, Memeit, Teamit" T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.