Skip to main content

What if America functioned on a similar model as Alcoholics Anonymous

By Matthew Hayward

If America functioned similarly to Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), it would likely be a society based on a decentralized, self-governing model, where decisions are made locally by consensus-based decision-making processes.

One potential consequence of such a model is that there would be less emphasis on central government authority and more focus on local community-driven initiatives. This could result in a society where people are more engaged in their communities and where there is a greater sense of shared responsibility for the well-being of the community as a whole.

Another possible outcome of an AA-like model in America is that there may be less emphasis on individualism and more focus on group accountability. In AA, individuals are held accountable to their peers, and decisions are made based on the collective good of the group. Similarly, in a society that functioned on an AA-like model, individuals may be more accountable to their communities, and decisions would be made based on what is best for the greater good of society.

Yet, an important distinction to bear in mind when considering this model is the critical element of a lack of force. In AA, participation and adherence to the group's decisions are completely voluntary. There are no legal consequences or enforcement mechanisms for those who choose not to follow the group's recommendations. Applying this principle to a societal model would mean that any rules, norms or guidelines established by the community are adhered to voluntarily by its members, without the use of force or coercion that is typically associated with government regulations. This lack of force may be seen as a strength, promoting greater personal responsibility, or as a weakness, potentially leading to less compliance. The balance between individual freedom and collective responsibility becomes a crucial factor in the viability of such a societal model. Thus, imagining America functioning on a similar model as AA suggests a radical reimagining of societal organization, highlighting the role of consensus, community, and voluntary cooperation in shaping collective life.



Labels:
Location: Olympia, WA, USA

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price  Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...
1 comment
Read more