The role of anarchy in ED

[Paeniteo Azrael]

Anarchy is lack of a public government.

Anarchism is a political philosophy. While definitely related, they are not necessarily the same thing.

This game is clearly using the original definition of anarchy, i.e. "a state of lawlessness." So if you are a faction inside a "lawless" system, you enforce whatever rules you are capable of enforcing. If those rules are guided by anarchism, so be it. If they are guided by liberalism, so be it. If they are guided by rule of might, or simple democracy, or hereditary rule, so be it. All the word "anarchy" means within the confines of the game system is "lacking law enforced by a public power."

If you subscribe to Kant's views of anarchy, good for you! If you subscribe to any other philosophy of anarchy, good for you! That is not how the word is being used in this game. It is used in a relatively neutral context, though the word itself has negative connotations. Words have different definitions, people. It pays to recognize that and be aware of what definition is being used in what ways.

 

[Kerenn]

Hello mates,

For instance what happens if an anarchy system degenarates into capitalistism, or communism? Would i be able to protect the current state (of anarchy) through community goals and efforts as described above? I like that train of thoughts.
All in all, are anarchy systems treated by FD as a social philosophy or as a disease? I hope it's the first.

Well, i wasn't expecting this to be a popular thread amongst the germans, english and americans that are the majority of this forum but i am really looking for an answer, especially from someone involved in the game development. I know i am asking too much, but what am i supposed to do? Send a ticket?(rofl)
So, bump it

First post at 3:44, and a bump at 4:43 ? You, sir, need to chill the frag out. This is a forum, not an instant messaging service of sorts. I usually read topics before going to work, ponder my answer during work and reply after my 8h workday (gotta squeeze a little work in all that pondering)

Anarchy systems are de facto non-aligned system. Meaning they are not under major factions jurisdiction. As in, you know, the ones labelled "independent"

Best bet is find one Mob/Cartel/Pirate outpost and work your reputation with ruling faction and make it your second home. Nice tip ! Will do that soon.

Anarchy in NOT chaos.

Anarchy is any one and/or all of the following:

1.The absence of government.
2. A state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority.
3. A society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government.
4. The absence or denial of any authority or established order.
5. A society without a publicly enforced government.

--> A true Anarchy is Law and freedom without force <-- My daddy used to say Real (utopian) Anarchy doesn't need no laws, because every citizen would be self-regulated (and "-regulatory").
But then I read that the etymology of Anarchy comes from "An" (privation of) "arkhia" (something akin to hierarchy). Thus making Anarchy a system in which there is no hierarchy (or total equality). Sure they can be rules and rulers (one or many) but there can be no coercition in doing so (effectively rendering rules moot -and unneeded- as long as one -or many- does not wish to follow them).

I really wasn't pointing a finger, but asking a question. You might try answering it.

In theory, it's quite simple. As Anarchy doesn't recognize Slavery as a "thing", if they spot you carrying human people, they have a wide array of choice :
- shooting you "accidentally" in the head, and wonder where those 520 tons of so called "slaves" might have wandered off. By the way, local government would like to know if you could grab 250 tons of grains and 250 tons of fruit for them, at 200% market price ?
- Unshackling every single slave, shouting "you're all free to go". Sure, some of those imperials would stay still and follow you because they want to "repay their debt", but given a new chance, free of your past on an anarchy that is equalitarian might convince some to leave the Empire's bonds.
- Try you. As they don't recognize Slavery as a "thing" that exist, they might have some government-issued questions about why you're carrying that many living and barely breathing humans in those canisters of yours. Surely you'd like to accompany the locals (non-officers) in a non-coercitive way ? To have a "non-coercitive" chat ?
- Something other I haven't thought of.
- Obi-wan Ben Kenobi.
- D, the answer D.
- 42.

...

There, third time's the charm. I thought those forums had an auto-save feature ?

 

[Sentenza]

There is anarchy in philosophers' minds, and there is anarchy in the real world. The latter is not pretty.

 

[Hethwill_Khan]

I really wasn't pointing a finger, but asking a question. You might try answering it.

No worries. Anarchy in E.D is a two fold thing. For one it can be a Independent System government type as shown in the Galaxy Map Info. It is also a term used by the community to refer to Independent systems, the non-aligned systems.

Anarchy Government types are not without law as a rule. They will enforce the normal game rules. Pirate systems more often than not are Confederations or Dictatorships.

There are not truly completely unruly free for all systems other than the non colonized ones.

 

[Jay_O_Doom]

As an anarchist, this is a bugbear of mine. I can see the need to give "lawless" systems an overarching category in the game, but "anarchy" is quite a misnomer for them. Any truly anarchist system would not tolerate slavery, for example.

And when we dig down into the history of piracy, we can see that many pirate crews were much more egalitarian than their state-controlled equivalents in the various navies of the world, often with officers up to and including the captain being democratically elected. Women were also often permitted to serve and to even command pirate vessels. In the various navies this would have been unthinkable.

 

[CMDR MassDef]

Hello mates,

First post at 3:44, and a bump at 4:43 ? You, sir, need to chill the frag out. This is a forum, not an instant messaging service of sorts. I usually read topics before going to work, ponder my answer during work and reply after my 8h workday (gotta squeeze a little work in all that pondering)

This made me laugh. This forum is so busy that after an hour my thread was buried at the bottom of the list (i had to go to my account just to re-bury it so that to reply. You are right though. Maybe i was too anxious to get a dev answer

There are many types and traditions of anarchy, and over the centuries, political philosophers, anthropologists and other thinkers changed the meaning of the word. From a political-philosophical point of view, the term 'Anarchy' is indeed wrongly chosen for a Elite System and it should be called 'Anomie'.
But commonly the term is used for disorder & chaos and nobody knows what an Anomie is...

So the easiest thing for you would be, to imagine, that from the 21st to the 34th century, political philosophers again changed the meaning of 'Anarchy' and now it indeed describes a system of disorder and chaos! -->problemo solved!

Anomie is a fantastic word that could replace anarchy, but that wouldn't change anything in terms of gameplay. To be honest i would prefere to have anarchy as a political system that interacts with other political systems based on its real characteristics. It would add so much depth, especially for those who care for "with whom i am working with and what does he represents"

So... how does an anarchist *enforce* his dictates that slavery is not allowed and all that? Seems like he would need to form a government and gain political authority to do so.
.
anarchy:
1.Absence of any form of political authority.


2.Political disorder and confusion.


3.Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose
.
http://dictionary.search.yahoo.com/...jb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ0M18x?p=anarchy&.sep=

Anarchy does not per sei enforce anything and this is what makes it unapplicable (according to history) in a human society. Anarchy accepts only anarchists. If you are into slavery or law enforcement then you are not accepted. It's not about a set of rules written by someone rather than a way of perceiving things as an individual.

But Elite isn't a political theory. In the game anarchy simply means "no rules".

edit: Way too slow. That's what you get for opening multiple tabs.

Yeah i know, but it's an alternative for some people and as i said before it could be used by the devs to add more salt into the ongoing Elite history. This can only be done if they acknowledge it as a political system

See I think for most people who are not of a political science bent (myself included) Anarchy == No Rules.

No Rules means selling people as slaves is fine.

I'm not for selling peoples as slaves myself. But there you go. It's an unfortunate by product of human nature.

If you replace the "no rules" with "no authority" it would be more political correct. It looks like a synonymous but its a lot different in its essence

There is anarchy in philosophers' minds, and there is anarchy in the real world. The latter is not pretty.

That's true but if you ask me i would like to have it in this game from a philosophic point of view

 

[Morbad]

Worst thing about ED Anarchies is that when you dock you get the same officious bureaucrats fining (and killing) you just for trying to park in the "wrong place". How does that work?, there are supposed to be no rules.

Even an anarchic society will take serious and coordinated issue with people who threaten to damage the structure that keeps them from the vacuum of space and provides them all with livelihood.

 

[Cosmos]

Is this a one-way example or it can be the other way around?

Yeah this occurred to me too.

 

[McDosy]

Anarchy is lack of a public government.

Anarchism is a political philosophy. While definitely related, they are not necessarily the same thing.

This game is clearly using the original definition of anarchy, i.e. "a state of lawlessness." So if you are a faction inside a "lawless" system, you enforce whatever rules you are capable of enforcing. If those rules are guided by anarchism, so be it. If they are guided by liberalism, so be it. If they are guided by rule of might, or simple democracy, or hereditary rule, so be it. All the word "anarchy" means within the confines of the game system is "lacking law enforced by a public power."

If you subscribe to Kant's views of anarchy, good for you! If you subscribe to any other philosophy of anarchy, good for you! That is not how the word is being used in this game. It is used in a relatively neutral context, though the word itself has negative connotations. Words have different definitions, people. It pays to recognize that and be aware of what definition is being used in what ways.

Well said.

 

[Cat_Astrophe]

There is anarchy in philosophers' minds, and there is anarchy in the real world. The latter is not pretty.

Indeed! The difference between theory removed from reality and that reality itself is where cognitive dissonance is encountered (for me, anyway). The self interested aspects of human nature does not change. But hey, someone may bring a plausible theory in the door yet. STIll don't see how formal "organized" theories of anarchy relate to the game universe.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

There is anarchy, which is lawlessness, and there is hippie nonsense. The same mush for brains kid with the stylized A emblazoned hoody probably has a Che poster in his mom's basement. Nuff said on the subject.

Now the important question: Where are the multigovernments from the original?

 

[deMangler]

There are lots of different ways in which people have tried to get Anarchy, as a social reality, to work. All of them have involved not Anarchy. Because. People.

I highly reccomend reading two books by Usula LeGuin - The dispossessed and Always Coming Home, for a good Science Fiction read and some insights on Anarchy too.

I also recommend reading this funny and quite deep short story by Eric Frank Russell called "and then there were none", about what happens when an Earth colony that has gone anarchy gets visited by some beaurcrats.

http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php

Really - read it.

 

[Kerenn]

There are lots of different ways in which people have tried to get Anarchy, as a social reality, to work. All of them have involved not Anarchy. Because. People.

I highly reccomend reading two books by Usula LeGuin - The dispossessed and Always Coming Home, for a good Science Fiction read and some insights on Anarchy too.

I also recommend reading this funny and quite deep short story by Eric Frank Russell called "and then there were none", about what happens when an Earth colony that has gone anarchy gets visited by some beaurcrats.

http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php

Really - read it.

Another Science-Fiction fan ! And of good taste ! You, sir, deserve some rep for the reading material.

 

[Atinus]

All in all, are anarchy systems treated by FD as a social philosophy or as a disease?

I think anarchy is a system state, indicating that there is no government. So a system descending into anarchy is one where the government is collapsing. This might come as a result of internal civil war, where both factions decimated each other, I'd imagine.

In the very least, it seems for anarchy to exist, there cannot be a dominant faction engaged in governing.

As for whether that definition will be pleasing to philosophical anarchists is another matter, but bear in mind that the system descriptions are generated by the Pilot's Federation, I believe, and so they are the ones classifying all the systems. So, it's an anarchic system, as far as the Pilot's Federation is concerned, which appears to be the lack of government. To influence those descriptions, I'd imagine you'd have to take over the Pilot's Federation.

For instance what happens if an anarchy system degenarates into capitalistism, or communism? Would i be able to protect the current state (of anarchy) through community goals and efforts as described above?

Well, assuming that the community goals are generated by in-game factions, there very well might be group missions to destablize this system or that. *But* the in-game factions that have the cash to pay out mass missions are those run by governments. So by assisting a faction in destablizing a system, it may not result in anarchy, but just yield that system to the rewarded faction. Something to keep in mind.

My second question has to do with the existence of slavery market in anarchy systems. Please, forgive my language but this is stupidly absurd! Anarchy does not tolerate slavery in any aspect of its existence. In fact one of the fundamentals of anarchism is the equality of humans.

That's an interesting opinion, but the slaver over yonder disagrees. He's taking advantage of the lack of law enforcement and cares not for your political ideals. Feel free to assassinate the slavers and liberate the slaves, though.

 

[deMangler]

Now the important question: Where are the multigovernments from the original?

Probably they are the systems that have many stations with seperate factions and govt types.