(December 28, 2011 at 11:26 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Banishment...is not a good idea. This is because other people don't want your criminals either. Can you imagine the diplomatic fallout if one of our criminals ended up somewhere else and committed crimes? (And they would probably be immediately banished by whichever state they went to, leading them to become homeless nomads.) Banishment relies on a sense of a "wild space" that, in most of the world, doesn't really exist anymore. Except for certain parts of the Middle East and Central Asia, there are no more "tribal lands" that people can just escape to. Even Mexico has become a fully functioning state (except perhaps in Oaxaca--and good luck trying to disappear to there!) This is an archaic idea with no place in the modern world. (Note: You could try to do it all Heinlein style and set aside a bit of land to banish people too. This would then be a prison.)
There really are no good ideas when it comes to this. Also your arguement is based on a falacy, that there has to be "wild space" for a banishment to occur. This is NOT required for a banishment to happen.
In the anarcho commune of Christiania, the Denmark police department would encourage junkies and criminals to move to Christiania if they didnt like being arrested. When the junkies went to the commune the commune kicked them out. In this situation it was clearly not about banishment, and more about a government pushing their problems upon a non-government (funny though, since these governments claim to have all the answers, yet they pushed their problems off on the anarchist society to deal with). The commune tried to help them, but could not, so they sent them back to their original city. The cops would cathc them, put them in police cars, and drive them to the gate of Christiania again. THAT is an example of pushing your problems unto other people.
In an anarcho commune, murder is something that practically never happens. So we would not be pushing murderers off onto other communities. Also, as evidenced by Christiania, those who were born in the communestayed in the commune, and were never a burdon upon the others. the only trouble makers were those who came in from other communities to start fights, rob or rape, because they have been told by their govt that "anarchy" means "shoot, kill, rape and pillage". This is an example of another communities failing members infiltrating a peaceful community to disrupt it.
In other words, banishment of willing and indiginous members of an anarcho community is practically unheard of. Murder between indiginous and willing members of an anarcho community is also just as unheard of.
Trouble makers in an anarcho community are almost 100% always visiting outsiders who think they can run roughshod over a community. They think "anarchy" is "do whatever the fuck you want to anyone", then they see the peaceful people of an anarcho community and then think to themselves "This is easy pickings!" what they dont know is that an anarcho community polices itself. that every member is bound to protect the others through communal interest. Within 24 hours these trouble makers are peacefully escorted to the main gate and told never to return again.
Returning another communities visiting trouble maker is not banishment, nor is it placing stress upon that community any more than it has already made for itself.
If anything, the neighboring communities of an anarcho commune will be the ones placing stress upon the shared system and their fellow neighbors, not the anarchists.
