[Index]
John Zube
PANARCHY
Described by the simple system of Aphthonius
(2005)
NoteAphthonius of Antioch, Greek sophist and rhetorician, flourished in the second half of the 4th century A.D., or even later.
The essential part of the Aphthonius system embraces 7 simple questions, which every seriously-intentioned reform advocate should answer, as a minimum requirement.
The questions could and should be supplemented and sub-divided to suit the subject.
Latin English German French Spanish Italian Quis? Who? Wer? Qui? ¿Quien? Chi? Quid? What? Was? Quoi? ¿Qué? Che cosa? Ubi? Where? Wo? Où? ¿Donde? Dove? Quibus auxiliis? Whereby? Wodurch? A travers qui-quoi? ¿A través quien-qué? Attraverso chi-che cosa? Cur? Why? Warum? Pourquoi? ¿Por qué? Perché? Quomodo? How? Wie? Comment? ¿Como? Come? Quando? When? Wann? Quand? ¿Cuando? Quando?
Do, please, draft, publish and try out your own utopias, panaceas, ideal societies and experiments among yourselves - but make sure that they do not constitute any impositions upon dissenters and that they provide rational answers to at least these 7 questions. In this attempt I have changed the order of these questions.
Choose your own sequence - do not omit any question but, rather, add others.
1. WHAT?
Panarchy (or aterritorial multigovernments – or Polyarchy or Personarchy) as the general framework for all the different degrees of liberty and/or restraint which individuals want for themselves in their own associations and voluntary communities, quite independent from those of others.
All presently compulsory memberships (e.g. in states, armed forces and trade unions) to become voluntary.
Territorial and collectivist monopoly claims (for large areas, occupied by many dissenting people) are no longer to be recognized and upheld. Thus territorial borders are to disappear, via peaceful "one-person-revolutions."
2. WHO?
All individuals who volunteer to participate in the realization or conservation of one or other ideal, reform, experiment, tradition or custom, together with all like-minded people, anywhere and always only at their own risk and expense, i.e., without infringing the individual rights and liberties of anyone else.
In short: Free individuals, without "royal charters" and territorial monopoly claims, aware of their equal rights and liberties – and respecting those of others.
Primarily dissenting minorities striving for self-rule.
All governments in exile already existing or still to be established, which do not favour any new monopoly power extended over the whole population of any territory.
All revolutionaries and freedom fighters who aim at no more than the development of freedom, so that they can gain the greatest number either of supporters or of people neutral towards them.
Thus, even the enemies of liberties are not provoked into desperate resistance. They can try to enjoy their own more or less authoritarian panarchies, as long as they accept them, directly and personally.
The federations of all autonomous communities, freely and peacefully coexisting and competing with each other for members, like many churches and insurance companies do - although they may dislike each other.
3. WHEREBY?
Individual sovereignty, individual secessionism, individualism, voluntarism, self-help and associationism going even to aterritorial autonomy and personal laws for the members of voluntary communities.
These new organizations are to realize full freedom to experiment or freedom of action or full minority autonomy for all, always at their own expense and risk only.
They are to have their own rule-making, adjudicating, protective and service institutions, to the extent that they consider them necessary or desirable, or will hire the services of competitive protection companies and of other public service companies.
Consumer sovereignty to prevail in all spheres in which politicians and bureaucrats have hitherto blocked or obstructed it.
Individuals to become free to choose for themselves and abide by different political, economic and social systems – all with their different membership contracts or constitutions, personal laws and fees or subscriptions.
4. HOW?
By withdrawal or disassociation of individuals from the existing territorial states, reclaiming their individual independence from them, freedom from their imposed tributes, institutions, laws and jurisdiction and also claiming their shares in the remaining capital assets of the territorial states they withdraw from.
However, the individuals must declare their readiness to pay their shares of the costs of institutions they are still using or want to use in common with the territorial statists. Details are to be peacefully negotiated or settled by arbitration.
Those who have withdrawn from the existing territorial states are to be free to run whatever contributory, budgetary, electoral and administrative system they want for themselves.
By the establishment of alternative, voluntary, aterritorial and parallel institutions, governments, non-governmental societies or experimental systems, with their own constitutions, personal laws, jurisdiction, policing and other services, in free competition with the existing territorial ones, freed from the burdens and regulations imposed upon their territorial counterparts.
E.g. freedom for alternative institutions and practices concerning education, police, courts, prisons, parks, libraries, banks, currency and finance systems, and so on.
Via individual consumer or contractor preferences, let the good and competitive institutions and services peacefully drive out the inferior ones, which are still imposed upon whole populations.
The individuals who have chosen to remain members of the former territorial states could retain all the laws and institutions they like - but could no longer force them upon others.
5. WHY?
Because territorial institutions, with their monopolies, size, power addicts' bureaucracy, and conventional territorial politics, have led to continuous strife, of which the strife among contending parties and the associated corruption are among the lesser evils, while national wars, violent revolutions and official or group terrorism are the major evils.
With state contestants now largely armed with ABC mass murder devices or other all too efficient tools for killing and destruction, the price to be paid for territorialism - in freedom, rights, security, blood and tribute-money, even in the very survivability of human beings - has become much too large to be any longer tolerable.
Peace, justice, freedom, progress & enlightenment can only become sufficiently assured and speeded up aterritorially and voluntaristically, by freedom of action for all to go their own ways towards their own ideals, at their own risk and expense and also to their own benefit.
Motives and opportunities for aggressions and crimes would become minimized.
Even the targets for mass extermination devices would dissolve.
6. WHEN?
Whenever the time is ripe for significant secessionist and self-help steps, e.g. during galloping inflations, by then introducing new, stable and competing currencies; during mass unemployment, achieving full employment via alternatively issued reliable media of exchange or clearing avenues, as well as alternative and sound value standards, all subject to refusals or discounting by all their potential acceptors.
When a territorial government wants to start another unjust war.
Whenever a despot becomes unbearable.
When no ruling or large opposition party upholds the rights and liberties of citizens at all or does not do so sufficiently.
When all minor self-help options become insufficient or blocked and when military insurrections and violent revolutions need averting.
When neither sufficient freedom of expression or information exist any longer and either emigration from unfree countries or immigration to somewhat more free countries are largely prevented.
7. WHERE?
Where there are dissatisfied or more or less suppressed and exploited minorities, or even majorities, in all countries and continents.
That is, practically, everywhere.
PRECEDENTS, DEMONSTRATIONS, EXAMPLES
Religious liberty.
Divorce.
Business partnerships.
Consumer sovereignty.
Competition between different sports and sports clubs, charities, scientific associations, universities.
Choice of doctors, medicines, jobs, hobbies, crafts, meals, contracts, tourist attractions, clothing, houses, gardening options, entertainment, arts involvements.
All the numerous daily choices of individuals to the extent that they are not pre-empted by government laws, regulations and institutions.
Personal laws, arbitration courts, freedom of association and disassociation in various clubs and organizations.
Dissent exists even within family and friendship circles but there voluntary separation is, as a rule, no longer outlawed.
PIOT, John Zube
(Panarchy In Our Time or
To each the government or non-governmental society of his/her choice!)
jzube@acenet.com.au
35 Oxley St., or P.O. Box 52, Berrima, NSW 2577, Australia,
Tel.: (02) 48 771 436.