Consent Above All Else
For the humans this is an existential matter: Can we overcome centuries of failed governance systems to achieve a single successful and enduring one?
The alien experiment
Imagine a large random sample of humans are abducted by aliens who wish to use them in a sociological experiment. You are transported to an earth like planet consisting of multiple widely separated independent islands. Each island has a social order copied from past human experience. You are told to make an irrevocable choice as to which island you wish to be transported.
Choices
There is an island called Regis, ruled by an all-powerful dynasty led by a hereditary king.
There is Autocratia, which is managed by powerful but unelected autocrats who own practically everything.
There is Bureaucratia, which resembles a democracy with popular elections every 5 years, but in which the power is held by bureaucrats answerable only to themselves.
Somalin is a wild territory ruled by dozens of fiercely competing warlords.
Mullastan is a theocratic society ruled by strict religious observances and all-powerful priests.
Anarchia consists of a collection of small self-sustaining communities each practicing their own preferred form of government.
One of those communities is called Consentia whose prime directive is: “Render no harm without consent, except in self-defense.”
Another called Dodonia applies the maxim, “Do as you would be done by” to all residents.
The Bentham community believes in the greatest good for the greatest number.
The aliens want to know which system will work best for these rebellious humans.
Which island, and which community, would you choose?
For me there is only one choice - Anarchia - the island without all-powerful rulers. And yet, strangely, back on Earth virtually everyone lives under the thumb of all powerful leaders, of one sort and the other. It's as though we have no choice, or no common sense.
Defining success
How would you identify the successful communities? They would be the ones that grow, through increased prosperity, through inwards migration, through successful policies and innovations. Less successful communities would shrink through outwards migration, if even possible. The direction in which the residents vote with their feet is a key measure of success.
Consentia
In Consentia the prime directive is “No harm without consent, except in self-defense”. Each individual citizen is sovereign. All relationships between people are consensual. No leader or organisation has more rights or authorities than any other citizen. Property rights are respected. Markets are free. Disputes are resolved by individuals in the community forming juries.
Body corporates
Matters of common interest in Consentia would probably be managed by private body corporates. Membership of and payments to these body corporates would be voluntary. As far as possible the body corporates would raise funds by providing useful facilities such as property registration, dispute resolution, border control, infrastructure, policing and external defence. Funds might be raised through taxes and levies, if a sufficiently convincing case can be made for them, but competition between body corporates would probably limit the amounts. There would be several competing body corporates vying for clients in the community. Inevitably, each body corporate would develop its own body of rules, which may be an incentive or disincentive for membership.
Migration
Would communities like Consentia allow unlimited inwards migration? Their prime directive is, “No harm without consent”. If a new immigrant is going to cause an individual harm, by taking up already occupied land or resources, then the immigrant would need the consent of the owner of such land or resources. They might get this consent through purchase, or rental, or begging, but never through threats or force. Unoccupied land on the boundary of Consentia would require no one’s consent to occupy. New immigrants would be required to sign a contract agreeing to the prime directive, enforced by existing owners and occupants through a private entity such as a body corporate. This newly occupied land would be absorbed into the territory of Consentia, like a membrane absorbing an adjacent cell. Thus, Consentia might physically grow through expansion of its borders and increase in population.
War
What if envious immigrants from other communities try to take land in Consentia by force? That would be a consent violation, and Consentia residents would have an agreed protocol for dealing with this. It will probably involve a well-trained group of private armed citizens, like Switzerland. It may involve a NATO-like mutual defence agreement between communities. It may involve using a mercenary force, possibly recruited from one of the other more violent islands. Funding for such mercenaries would be raised voluntarily by the Consentia body corporates.
Rules
Would Consentia need more than one primary rule? Rules breed lawyers like dung breeds maggots. The advantage of the one primary rule is that it is so simple anybody can understand and apply it. If a conflict arises, you only need to show harm without consent occurred and you have made your case. This would also be obvious to your fellow citizens, who would support your case against an aggressor. The primary rule would always take precedence in any dispute.
Conclusion
For the aliens this would be an interesting sociological experiment. For the humans this is an existential matter. Can we overcome centuries of failed governance systems to achieve a single successful and enduring one? The aliens provided the space for this experiment to unfold. Do we have the common sense to succeed?
Trevor Watkins is the founder of the Individualist Movement, the author of two books, and an Associate at the Free Market Foundation. He publishes on a blog at libertarian.org.za. Copyright Trevor Watkins 19/7/2025
 | A guest post by
|