With all of this drama concerning the Supreme Court I'm sure you're asking yourself, what's this Anarcho Monarchism everyone is talking about?

1  2018-09-29 by RMFN

It is a society of kings. We believe that all are sovereign. All are equal.

Though there is no formal legal hierarchy there is a judicial system for adjudicating contractual disputes and criminal level norm infractions. A "king" or "queen" no greater than any other presides over this judiciary as Chief Justice or the judge.

Sure every society will be set up a bit different that's just how anarchy works but the basic structure of absolute freedom and equality will be the same.

There will be something like a mayor or high King that will be chosen each year through a round robin of arm wrestling and competitive slam poetry among eight other tasks. Our leaders are chosen though deeds, not glorified popularity contests. We believe democracy is Stockholm syndrome. Leaders act for what is right.They do not need to "vote".

Under anarcho monarchism;

Usury is illegal.

Rent is illegal.

Exploitation is illegal.

Land ownership requires active improvements upon the land. Unimproved land is in the commons. The commons are to be respected. To defile the commons is a serious offence.

Anarchy means no rulers. Not no rules. There are still laws and norms based in non aggression. You can't just go stealing from other kings...

Well I'm sure every society that forms along these lines will formulate their own rituals over time. That is why I don't specifically name tasks. But in my mind they would be tasks that prove the aspiring leader will be well rounded.

I would say, in addition to the sheer strength and oratory skills being tested by arm wrestling and competitive slam poetry tests like, sailing, hunting/fishing, ceremonial headdress making, knot tying, cigarette rolling, knife sharpening and finally a dance off would prove the prowess of any king.

Sailing shows knowledge of travel and independence. Hunting proves a unity with nature. A ceremonial headdress will be a show of honoring ancestral rites. Knot tying metaphorically shows the ability to join two opposing sides of an issue and or the ability to dispatch a criminal. Cigarette rolling proves the king is cool enough. Knife sharpening shows their steady hand and attention to detail. And finally the dance off proves they have the moves it takes to he king.

Well that's the jist... Any questions?

76 comments

1  KeithCarter4897 2018-09-29

Nobody was asking themselves any of that. Thanks though.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

You can speak for ""everyone""?

1  KeithCarter4897 2018-09-29

I just did

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

... Very Eurocentric of you.

1  666SignoftheBEAST 2018-09-29

It's anarchy but with a monarch, laws, and community property?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Anarchy can have laws. It means no rules, not no rules.

1  666SignoftheBEAST 2018-09-29

But there is a ruler. He is selected based on 8 (maybe it was 10?) tasks on a yearly basis.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Leader != Ruler.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Pretty sure it means no rules. Who enforces your rules?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. Look up the word.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

An absence of authority. Rules, however enforced, represent authority.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Ask any anarchist if they approve of murder.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Doesn't alter the definition.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Anarchy doesn't mean murder is okay. You're confusing a lack of rulers with a lack of morals. Very typical Semitic mistake.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

I'm not confusing anything. You have yet to address my point. If you give rules authority over you, it isn't anarchy. Not that complicated. What you describe is not anarchy. It's simply making authority more localized.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Woah, who said a leader has authority over a person?

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Not me. I said rules.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

It's very basic and based off of the non aggression principle. If someone tries to impose authority on another I.e. exploitation the judiciary steps in.

You're obviously not getting it.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

And how does the judiciary enforce its decisions? I do get it, it's just utopian nonsense.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

The same way any nation does.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Be specific

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

A court.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

And who enforces the courts ruling?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

The community at large.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

How exactly does that work?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

It works however the particular society set it up. I'm sure it'll be slightly different everywhere.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

But the devil is in the details.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

You expect me to impose my preconceived notions onto societies that have not formed yet?

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

I expect if you are going to propose a different system you would have thought it through. My mistake.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Typical. You won't allow people to decide on their own how they want their society to function? You went me to have it all planned out?

You see how foolish that is?

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

What I see is you presenting a system of government and when pressed for actual operating details you come up blank. Do you see how foolish that is? This was your idea, you asked if there were any questions. I have some and you get offended that I asked.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. I'm not coming up with a blank. You're asking questions that cannot be answered for sure. I could give my opinion that's all. Which in the context adds nothing.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Yeah, that would be coming up blank. Your system has the courts deciding issues but no system of enforcement. That's a big gap.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. Just because you don't get it doesn't make it "utopian"

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

No, the fact that's nonsense makes it utopian.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

It's only nonsense to you.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

I'm pretty sure that's not true.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

What is nonsensical about my post?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

So you don't have any gripes with the ideology out sode of the name??

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Well yeah. It's nonsense.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

You're nonsene.

You see how easy that is?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Leftist dribble.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Community enforcement.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

So you give the community authority over. Still not anarchy.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. Exactly it's not anarchy. It's anarcho monarchism.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Then why did you say anarchy doesn't mean no rules? It clearly does mean that.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

That's not what it means.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

They are only rules if they have authority over you. Otherwise it's just suggestions. Authority means no anarchy.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Typical statist who refuses to understand other peoples points of view.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

You have still not refuted my point.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

I have repeatedly. You refuse to understand the definitions presented.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

I understand them. You are simply denying what a word means. You want it to mean something else.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. No you are claiming I'm taking about anarchy and monarchy, that's false. I'm talking about anrcho monarchism. Which is neither

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

No I'm claiming your definition of anarchy is wrong. You were the one who posted the definition in defense of your position, not me.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. Anarcho not anarchy.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Again, you made the claim not me. It's in your original post.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Exactly. Anarcho != anarchy.

1  labledcrazy 2018-09-29

You see this maggots post history?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Oh yeah. Hence the effort.

1  ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-09-29

Anarcho Monarchism

lmao

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

What's funny?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

What's funny?

1  ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-09-29

The name just seems ridiculous, even if you could argue it's not a contradiction.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

How so? It is not.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Well a monarch is a ruler, so where does the anarchy part come in?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Incorrect. A leader is not the saw as a "ruler". A leader is an equal.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

But s monarch is a ruler.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Incorrect. It is a leader.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

They aren't mutually exclusive, but the dictionary disagrees with you. I suppose if you are going to make up your own definitions you can call anything whatever you want.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

You do understand the difference between giving orders and leading by example? Or are you just misrepresenting my argument on purpose?

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

I have not misrepresented anything. I have simply pointed out where your definitions are wrong.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Then tell me the difference.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

A monarch is a ruler. Anarchy means no rules.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

You didn't read the op. Obviously.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

I did read it. I've been commenting on it and asking questions about it. So far your answers making up definitions to suit your narrative and demonstrating that you have not really thought this through. Which is why I called it utopian nonsense. Have you not been paying attention?

1  JusticeMerickGarland 2018-09-29

Hyphenated-Syndicationism

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Anarchy can have laws. It means no rules, not no rules.

1  666SignoftheBEAST 2018-09-29

But there is a ruler. He is selected based on 8 (maybe it was 10?) tasks on a yearly basis.

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

Pretty sure it means no rules. Who enforces your rules?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Woah, who said a leader has authority over a person?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

The community at large.

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. No you are claiming I'm taking about anarchy and monarchy, that's false. I'm talking about anrcho monarchism. Which is neither

1  Iwrite4uDPP 2018-09-29

How exactly does that work?

1  RMFN 2018-09-29

Lol. I'm not coming up with a blank. You're asking questions that cannot be answered for sure. I could give my opinion that's all. Which in the context adds nothing.