Skip to main content

Weathering With You: An Agorist Perspective

If someone asked you what your favorite emotion was, how do you think you’d answer? For many people, I suspect they would answer “Happiness”, “Joy'', or some variant of exclusively positive emotion. Someone may think more meticulously and answer with “Contentment”, which while a positive emotion has a lot of nuance attached to it. However my answer to that question is what I feel others would consider more orthodox: Bittersweet. Pleasure accompanied by suffering, not exactly most people’s first pick but from my perspective pain is necessary in order to enjoy the pleasure that life gives you. Perhaps I'm over-romanticizing but there’s something to desire from looking back fondly at times where you were hurting and seeing yourself in a better place in the present. Perhaps you finally have moved on from “The one who got away” and can look back on those times with fondness. Perhaps you are sharing stories of a friend or family member at their funeral and though they may never w

The Agorist Calculation Problem




I don't think it was a coincidence that Konkin was so inclusive in describing who is acting in his counter-economic idea world - It is quite a crowd, after all[1] - and on top of that, the actions themselves are more often than not something you didn't have to participate in all the time.


You can slide in and out of the gray and white markets as the need to do so arise. Life-style Agorism is very hard to keep 100% pure the stronger and more involved the State is around your person and those you are trading with on the outside of your personal sphere of control. Every action that gives those thieves in government a slightly less lucrative payday is valuable, no matter how small. Or, to use Konkin's own word: "'Libertarian' has nothing to do with what one says but what one does[2]

My hypothesis is that Konkin understood all this and that is the reason the manual for Agorists is so open-hearted: He (consciously or subconsciously) wanted to avoid something I like to call the Agorist Calculation Problem.


Is this the Black Market?

The first side of the problem is an internal one. I'll give two different examples, which hopefully illustrates 1) why this is a very complicated matter and 2) That it is almost impossible to live and avoid all government tentacles.

If I buy raw material on "the books" (taxed, regulated, allowed), transform it into something more valuable and sell the finished product off the books (untaxed, non-licensed, not allowed), what I have done is counter-economic.


If a ride-sharing app opposes the taxi-monopoly[3], but the company still comply with the state's taxation bookkeeping and the system as a whole, it is hardly counter-economic. If I, on the other hand, negotiate a price with a "pirate taxi" driver that'll keep the money in her own pocket, what I have done is counter-economic.

If you think long and hard about the above examples you will find a non-trivial amount of ways I have, indirectly, supported the formal economy:

The cab driver in example number 2 most likely bought the car legally with all the fees and import taxes paid, drives with a state-mandated license and refuels the car with heavily taxed gas. You can truly get analysis paralysis if you start going down the list of everything the state requires for cars themselves, their fuel and all the regulations in regards to simply being a worker.

Critics might say this is a measurement of how "unpure" my Agorism is, depending on what the critics value the most. I see it rather as a measurement of state-involvement in taxi-drivers life and how my action seeks to separate me and the driver from this.

The Agorist Calculation Problem in this instance would be a numbers game trying to track how much state involvement I was involved in on the backend, but I don't need to whip out an abacus and make a complicated recount to know who isn't getting a cut in the final exchange in the taxi-example. Every step we separate from the state on our way to the final product is great, but Something is better than Nothing and I rarely let perfect stand in the way of good enough.

The immune system of the Agora

"Now, assuming the government doesn't start clamping down on those selling in the agora, they will just tax those above board even more. There will always be a ceiling for how much the agora can grow with the existence of a state" - Jim Jesus [4]






I count Jim Jesus as one of the sane and sound critics of the Agorist strategy and I wish there were more of those because it is so valuable to be challenged in your "faith" with good arguments that make you think.

Is there a ceiling for how much the agora can grow with the existence of a state? Yes and no - This is the second side to the Agorist Calculation Problem: the external one.

In a large enough population, there will always be conservative individuals and groups that prefer the "good old ways" to anything new - There are still royalists here in Norway that insist we pay the upkeep of a castle for rich blue bloods in 2019!

So, when we are counting all the heads you will always find those that want to bow theirs, that wants to outsource thinking, security, and liberty to some higher centralized power - That is the natural ceiling for the agora, as I see it. The external side of the Agorist Calculation Problem is an insistence on that everyone or (close to everyone) needs to board the train before we can leave the station.  That is, simply put, impossible by pure math.

However, no, there is no ceiling on how large the agora can grow if we go beyond counting heads. With a good-enough immune system of the agora.

If the state can't tax my income, my industry is shielded with camouflage and good neighbors; When the immune system of the agora itself is so intact that any state-monopoly claims are irrelevant, there is no ceiling - We might as well take off the roof and let in more sun.




The state doesn't need to end for everyone, just internally between Agorists and whoever wants to trade with Agorists. The formal economy can't compete with their handcuffs on - Smugglers, homebrewers, guerilla gardeners, kitchen counter chemists, illegal bookies, and other Unregulated can undercut the white market, or even provide something the Regulated can't. Everyone trading in that space will come out with more expected value per buck put in.

If we interpret Konkin 'End of the State' as absolute and for everyone, we tangle ourselves into the Agorist Calculation Problem purely by the impossibility of the math involved - Not all humans want to be responsible for their own lives and live in a voluntary world. I can round up plenty of people that don't want to concern themselves with who builds and manages the roads, just that they are built. The state will never end for those people. Let them keep it.




- Alex Utopium




------------------------------------------



[1] Non-regulated Prostitutes, tax evaders and people speeding all participate in counter-economics under Konkin's umbrella.



[2] Konkin in his reply to Rothbard.


[3] Uber did this in Norway to the point that the app and company got banned (with the exception of Uber Black). The Norwegian Government has now changed stance on the matter and Uber is allowed back into the fold.

[4] From his youtube-video "Opposing the Collapse; Accelerationist Libertarianism and Agorist Maximalism" (highly recommended watch and it's well worth the 15-minute investment).





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Truth About Global Warming

Libertarians who deny the existence of global warming run the risk of making us all look like a bunch of illiterate fools. Much like economics, being ignorant of planetology or climate science isn't a crime, but having a "loud and vociferous" opinion on the subject while remaining in a state of ignorance can be a dangerous thing. And frankly, the science behind climate change is elementary. Sunlight enters our atmosphere and warms our planet. Earth then gives off that heat in the form of infrared radiation (this is the same principle behind those cool goggles our collapsitarian friends have). However, and this is a crucial point - the CO₂ molecules in our atmosphere do not allow IR to easily escape back into space. This is known as the greenhouse effect. As the temperature of the planet increases, polar ice caps melt and eventually surface water will begin to evaporate. Since H₂0 also prevents IR from escaping our atmosphere, the additional water vapor only compound

The Counter-Economics of COVID

In March 2020 - some say earlier, but by March 2020 at latest - the banking had sector collapsed. In response, coronavirus was manufactured as a scapegoat to justify the liquidity injection necessary to keep the Federal Reserve’s ponzi scheme alive. The State’s narrative would henceforth be: ‘Since all businesses were shut down, an unprecedented amount of money must be printed and distributed to the public.’ Milton Friedman’s helicopter money had come to fruition. But like a junkie chasing his initial high, the Fed had become immune to the effects of monetary stimulus. Each injection requiring a stronger, more potent dose of cheap & easy money. Less than two years later, and the effects of that stimulus have now waned & the banksters are poised to pull off another heist. As the business cycle continues to ebb and flow until the day of final reckoning, the State can be expected to behave in an increasingly erratic fashion. Like a cornered cat, or a fish out of water, the State

The Trouble With Dave Smith

  On the issues, Dave & most agorists can find agreement 99 out of 100 times, but as libertarians we have a habit, a pastime - a duty even, to seek out & argue over the 1% of things we don’t agree on. In keeping with that tradition friends, I've got to tell you, when it comes to strategy, Dave Smith seriously fumbles the ball. The fundamental issue is that @comicdavesmith is interested in creating libertarians, whereas agorists are interested in creating liberty. Dave has a classic case of @perbylund ’s Savior Complex - the irrational desire of individualists to save the collective whole of society. There are lots of problems with this, but even if creating libertarians is a worthy goal, does that mean the Libertarian Party is the best vehicle to accomplish this task? Has anything the Libertarian Party ever done caused even a slight retreat of statism? Dave rightly points to his own success at spreading the message of liberty. It's true, no one - save Ron Paul or Tom