Yes Communism fails and would even had been tried if enough people had understood human nature correctly. I won't fault them too much for not understanding human nature because the failure of communism is one of the things that made me understand that individuals have neither sufficient inclination to work for the good of the majority nor the intelligence to work for the good of the majority needed to make any non-market based economic system work for the good of the majority and or to make any non-democracy based form of government work for the good of the majority. The trial and error of the market place reveals truth better than human intelligence does in the field of micro-economics and in business in general. The fittest survive and grow and the unfit grow weak and die and this is how things should be at least for businesses. The fact that communism (the most unanarchistic government and and economic system ever tried) failed miserably does not mean that that it's opposite (anarchism) is good and would work. As miserably as communism failed, it did not fail as miserably as feudalism failed and feudalism is closer to anarchism than democracy is.
Freedom might be achievable by yourself in the Artic Tundra or in a desert or some other place that your fellow humans find to be of no value. Perhaps you could even have a spouse and still be almost free. But if you want to live with the masses freedom is not an option. No slavery is not an option given human nature. Which do you prefer, being enslaved by the majority through democracy or being enslaved by a small clique that has managed by ingenuity, charisma and violence to gain control over the people in the region in which you live?
Real freedom is not even possible alone if our habits, blindnesses, beliefs, unconsciousness and desires still rule us. But that is a different subject.
Feudalism is close to anarchism? Actually communism is closer to anarchism because communism emphasized equality whereas feudalism emphasized hierarchy; and since anarchy means "without rulers", communism is theoretically much closer than feudalism is. And what does feudalism have to do with the free market? Feudalism was private, but not free market; people were forced to work, the land was illegitimate, and the state did plenty of intervening (the Kings and Dukes and such). No free market. It absolutely is. Libertarian gov't. I agree How about neither? Because with a libertarian gov't, you can choose freedom.
And how do the Libertarians obtain and hold power? Via democracy or armed forces? Do you know a third path to power?
A libertarian gov't ought to be the default since all consensual, voluntary activities are allowed and there is no violation or coercion of property and property rights. And since, under such a gov't all are free to do as they please (without harming others, of course), and no one forces anything on anyone else, there is no reason to vote for any other kind of gov't.
So you are advocating Libertarianism via democracy? And you are advocating a government that coerces people to accept other peoples right to inherit property from their parents without giving any compensation to the people who inherited nothing from their parents? And you are advocating a government that coerces people into not harming other people?
Of course we don't have, nor should we have democracy. Take the US. The citizens are allowed to choose between a few choices of representative for any given office. They are not allowed to be aware of any "real" policy or effect them at all. This is not to say I'm in favor of the republic either. I believe the people want, no, need a government which will protect them from themselves and each other, while providing their basic needs at no charge. I do not think a human could possibly lead such a government without becoming utterly corrupt. Thus, we should develop a strong general AI and set it up as ruler/owner of everything and everywhere on earth.
I would like to point out that Norsefire is advocating a government based on a VERY idealistic view of human nature. People, by nature, are selfish, cruel, and prone to greed and laziness. I applaud your idealism, however, idealism never works.
There is no coercion in that respect; all other forms of gov't are coercive on someone. A libertarian gov't allows the people to choose for themselves and so ought to be the gov't style by default. Everything else is unnecessary because with a libertarian gov't everyone can have their way. Actually, selfishness, cruelness, and greed are perfect for capitalism. Selfishness is rational and greed is good. It is communism that is idealistic. With capitalism, you work and you reap the benefits of your work. Rational. With communism, you are supposed to "work for the greater good" and everyone is supposed to work together...which doesn't happen.
Depending on the association you have with them. Not if you're self-employed. With employment, you reap the benefit of having ready access to a revenue source but the employer gets the access to your labor and yes, usually, they get more of what you make but that is the contractual arrangement. Creating a business and being self-employed is always best, IMO, if possible and it provides the most independence and the most rewards.
