On Anarchy

True anarchy begins as un-landed anarchy or at most transiently landed anarchy. Once you start establishing permanent exclusive domains on land, justice requires that you give back the value of the land to the others whom you are excluding. Hence, land rent.

Land rent does not require a government and would work without a state; it is the just thing to do. However, people don't always do the just thing. Right libertarians make silly arguments like: "land is not common" or "this is my land because I was here first". People don't always do the just thing, which is why there are private collection agencies and many people avoid paying what they need to pay. It is also the reason there are courts.

I used to be an anarchist and in some ways I still think I am. However, justice is more paramount and eliminating the government is not anymore a necessary goal for me to establish justice. It would be nice to eliminate the State, with all its ugly baggage such as interventionism; if only everyone else did the right thing. But we live in reality - we can’t even agree on what the right thing is.

Anarchy means more than the absence of the state; it is the absence of violence. Hence, in theory, if people voluntarily did what is expected of them within the societal arrangements, then there would be no situations where violence is inevitable. Of course, this can only be sustained if people are satisfied: their basic liberties are maintained and they are happy. The question then becomes 'what is the best societal arrangement that produces the most freedom for everyone?'; I have concluded for myself that it's in Georgism. People have rights to occupy land but the value of the land belongs to everyone.

People ask how Georgism can be reconciled with an anarchy. It is not an elaborate arrangement. Set up a trust where the land rent goes and have private assessors determine market land rent values at regular intervals. Then have the money go straight to citizens dividend.