Are you an anarchist?

Dis · March 25, 2003, 05:17

I got a link to this site from a liberal website.

This is an anarchist website.

http://infoshop.org/

And people continue to say anti-war people aren't anti american. Granted anarchists don't make up most of the anti-war crowd, they do make up a significant portion.

What I don't understand is how people can be so stupid to believe this as a viable way of life. I don't get it. Am I missing something?

"Anarchism, therefore, is a political theory that aims to create a society which is without political, economic or social hierarchies. Anarchists maintain that anarchy, the absence of rulers, is a viable form of social system and so work for the maximisation of individual liberty and social equality. They see the goals of liberty and equality as mutually self-supporting."

"So Anarchism is a political theory which advocates the creation of anarchy, a society based on the maxim of "no rulers." To achieve this, "[i]n common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear: and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And. . . they maintain that the ideal of the political organisation of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to minimum. . . [and] that the ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government to nil -- that is, to a society without government, to an-archy""

"All branches of anarchism are opposed to capitalism. This is because capitalism is based upon oppression and exploitation"

I don't have much to add here. We live in a captialist country. If they don't like it they can leave. But they won't do that. Instead they are trying to overthrow the U.S. goverment. These aren't just peace (and other types) of protests. Again they don't represent the majority of peace protestors, but there are quite a few anarchists in their ranks.

So many protestors who do not break the law I have no problem with. But quite a few of them in Chicago and San Francisco are attempting to shut down goverment buildings and businesses which is in tune with the anarchist movement.

Why is it they are not considered traitors?

Kropotkin · March 25, 2003, 05:20

Yes I am. That, however, doesn't mean I have much in common with any other anarchists at all.

edit:

Quote:

If they don't like it they can leave.

i always find this way of reacting against people with different views and ideas to be very "interesting". Why should anarchists leave as opposed to other groups that want changes? Maybe blacks that doesn't like the way they are threated should leave? Or homosexuals...

Ramo · March 25, 2003, 05:24

Yes I am. And we are considered traitors. There's a good chance that your locality has laws criminalizing anarchists, even if they aren't enforced anymore.

Dis · March 25, 2003, 05:26

my locality is a fairly new city. I seriously doubt we have any laws against anarchists. My city was created in the 20th century.

Ramo · March 25, 2003, 05:29

In that case, then probably not.

Drake Tungsten · March 25, 2003, 05:29

Quote:

There's a good chance that your locality has laws criminalizing anarchists, even if they aren't enforced anymore.

It's high time we enforced them.

Dis · March 25, 2003, 05:30

I do not believe it is in human nature to not exploit people. People will stab even their friends in their back to get ahead. There have been college studies that have proven this.

While you can argue that the ideal is to treat each other fairly, I'm certain that is not possible. These things are hard wired into our survival of the fittest code.

Capitalism is very exploitive. But it is also the most natural system around.

Can you imagine the level of exploitation that would exist in anarchy? It would be more exploitation of the strongest instead of the smartest. But that hardly makes it better. And quality of life would be non-existant.

At least this way I get to use indoor plumbing and have electricity to power my computer to post at Apolyton.

.

That is more than enough reason to believe this is the best system around.

Kropotkin · March 25, 2003, 05:36

There has been a lot of things that have been proven by college studies. Also you're confusing normative statements and opinions with science. To use the words of David Hume, you cannot derive an 'ought' from an 'is'.

Berzerker · March 25, 2003, 07:34

Dissident, will you leave the country if the government does something you don't like?

Btw, I'm an anarchist of sorts, although not a leftist. Maximising freedom is my goal, not "equality". And I don't see how both can exist within the same system since freedom will have to be compromised to achieve "equality".

ThePlagueRat · March 25, 2003, 08:35

*singing* I am a bananaist, I am an antichrist...

Az · March 25, 2003, 08:38

No.

ThePantaloonDog · March 25, 2003, 09:33

No, but I'd like to be one day.

red_jon · March 25, 2003, 10:25

I don't believe anarchy is workable, just as true communism isn't.

I'm a social democrat - even though we can never achieve true equality, we should try and improve the lives of people as best we can in democratic system.

Az · March 25, 2003, 10:45

ewww. social democrats. the worst of the two worlds.

Urban Ranger · March 25, 2003, 11:04

I am an Antidisbananist.

SlowwHand · March 25, 2003, 11:15

Anarchy.

Looks like we have a list of nominees for ACS 'Tard Award.

Az · March 25, 2003, 11:17

curse you! We Pseudo-Marshmello Artificial Bananists will hunt each one of you down some day!

[/spam]

Messer Niccolò · March 25, 2003, 11:19

Anarchy doesn't exist.

Bananysm enlightens us...

SlowwHand · March 25, 2003, 11:29

Banana

Spiffor · March 25, 2003, 11:35

Definitely not anarchist. I don't believe a cohesive society can exist without rules or someone to enforce them.

monkspider · March 25, 2003, 12:05

Anarchy is inevitable, but it is further down the road than socialism. I would say we should expect it sometime around 2020, give or take a year or two. People often think anarchy has sinister conotations, but all it is really is mankind evolving beyond the need for governments.

VetLegion · March 25, 2003, 12:10

No. The Party of Moderate Progress Within Limits of the Law is where I stand politicaly.

GePap · March 25, 2003, 12:11

Fanatical anarchism is the political notion I find most abhorrent of all. No, I am not an anarchist, never will be, though I object less to the anarcho-syndicalist notions someone like Ramo supports.

Starchild · March 25, 2003, 12:27

Depends what day of the month it is. Ideally, I'd link worker owned businesses competing in a free market environment with little to no government support. Emotionally, I tend to connect far more to the city-state concept than the nation concept. When people ask where I'm from, I'm more likely to mention the city I live in than the country. I consider myself a Torontonian (though mainly because I'm not Canadian yet lived in near Toronto for years.)

Az · March 25, 2003, 14:28

What really cracks me up, though, is Anarcho-fascism.

( I know you have nothing to do with that, Ramo)

monkspider, why do you think that this would be a good thing?

nationalist · March 25, 2003, 16:24

I have some pretty authoritarian view points

ThePlagueRat · March 25, 2003, 16:33

Pre-20th century Anarchism has some interresting point of views.
(Ideologically speaking) You just need to understand the philosophies, and take it for what it is.

I got somthing I call the Cardamom-law:

"Thou shalt not plague others, thou shalt be nice and fair...
but otherwise thou shall do what thou wilt"

It's pretty anarchistic isn't it?

alva · March 25, 2003, 16:35

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider
Anarchy is inevitable, but it is further down the road than socialism. I would say we should expect it sometime around 2020, give or take a year or two. People often think anarchy has sinister conotations, but all it is really is mankind evolving beyond the need for governments.

I'm affraid your timing is of by a couple of centuries, but I do agree with you.

To me anachy (among other things) means no laws. Most people don't really need a law to tell them what is right and was is wrong. This doesn't mean that there shouldn't be any rules(guidelines) to organise things.

nationalist · March 25, 2003, 16:52

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider
Anarchy is inevitable, but it is further down the road than socialism. I would say we should expect it sometime around 2020, give or take a year or two. People often think anarchy has sinister conotations, but all it is really is mankind evolving beyond the need for governments.

Sorry Monk, but you have waaaaaay too much faith in your fellow man. You live in the U.S. Do you really think that the inner city will evolve beyond the need foy laws in 15-20 years? Do you think that all of our social problems will solve themselves? There would be unimaginable violence the second that laws and authority disappear, because there woiuld be nothing to restrain people from doing and taking whatever they wanted. Anarchy would last about five minutes unitl the military would step in take control.

I don't think that anarchy will ever "evolve" because people are still peole. They have wants and desires, and always will have them, even the most "wise and enlightend" individuals. Some people will inevitably develop mental illnesses and go on a killing spree. How would an anarchic "society" deal with a madman who is slaughtering people? Would they unite to protect themselves from him? The formation of these types of groups would be the beginning of government, just as the Enlightenment thinker Hobbes had envisioned in the "State of Nature" Anarchy is the Sate of Nature, and humanity would never stay in this state. Why would anyone want to? I am glad that we have a government. People can't control themselves or take persoanal responsibility for themselves as is. Why do you think that all of the sudden everyone will be able to? Also, Anarchy would require use revert to a primative lifestyle, simply because there is no societal structure to create materials or provide goods. How many of you anarchists can build a car or a computer from scratch? How many of you know how to farm effectively or to build a house? There are going to be some cold, hungry days ahead from you when the government declares itself useless.

monkspider · March 25, 2003, 17:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel
What really cracks me up, though, is Anarcho-fascism.

( I know you have nothing to do with that, Ramo)

monkspider, why do you think that this would be a good thing?

It's not so much a thing that can be seen as subjectively good or it's just a future stage in human evolution. I am not an anarchist by any sense of the defintion, i just realize that once man becomes wise enough, governments will no longer be needed. As I said, this is further down the road than socialism.