Anarchism

[brotherinexile]

delete post

[Guest1]

Symbols should have little to do with your beliefs, nonetheless:

[SittingBull47]

just don't go to Hot Profit and get those god damn Chucks with the Anarchist A printed all over them. Those are for fucks.

Che y Marijuana, did you change your avatar slightly?

[Guest1]

Slightly... I had an urge.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 06:11 PM
what is the symbol in tje middle and what does it mean
It's a big "A" and it stands for Anarchism.

[Blackberry]

Originally posted by Che y Marijuana+May 26 2004, 06:42 PM--> (Che y Marijuana @ May 26 2004, 06:42 PM)
[email protected] 25 2004, 06:11 PM
what is the symbol in tje middle and what does it mean
It's a big "A" and it stands for Anarchism.[/b]
A slight correction: The "circled A" represents Proudhon's slogan -- "Anarchy is Order". That is the meaning given to it today, but no-one knows the true origins of the "circled A".

[The Feral Underclass]

This might come in handy

Anarchist Flags (http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/anarc.html)

[Guest1]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 26 2004, 06:45 AM
A slight correction: The "circled A" represents Proudhon's slogan -- "Anarchy is Order". That is the meaning given to it today, but no-one knows the true origins of the "circled A".
I thought he was talking about the new addition to my avatar.

[Comrade BNS]

you changed your avatar?

i'm interested now.....

any chance of a "before-after" ?

Comrade BNS

[Guest1]

Before:

[Intifada]

no offence cym, but i like the before one better.

[Danton]

I'm thinking of switching my beleifs to Nazism, what symbols or flags do they use?

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 05:33 AM
no offence cym, but i like the before one better.
So do I, I'm switching back till I can find a better way to slip it in :P

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 10:46 AM
I'm thinking of switching my beleifs to Nazism, what symbols or flags do they use?

Here ya go

[Deathb4Dishonor]

Any one who is an anarchist ether dosnt understand it or is very stupid

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 10:06 PM
Any one who is an anarchist ether dosnt understand it or is very stupid
Very constructive.

Could you put that in at least a paragraph, with that thing called "logic" somewhere in the middle?

You can disagree, but you need to show why, rather than just say "stupid". I&#39;m going out on a limb here, but would I be wrong to assume you&#39;ve never read any books on Anarchism? <_<

Doesn&#39;t understand indeed.

[Danton]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 07:16 PM
Here ya go
That is truly marvellous, :lol:

[Deathb4Dishonor]

read any books? what is this a joke like the joke about an anarchist meeting? what could i learn from reading a book about anarchist that i dont already know

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 02:56 PM
read any books? what is this a joke like the joke about an anarchist meeting?
Are you an idiot? Anarchists have meetings, unions and organizations. No rulers does not mean no rules, no hierarchy does not mean no organization.


what could i learn from reading a book about anarchist that i dont already know
Everything.

You obviously know absolutely nothing about Anarchism. If you think I&#39;m wrong, prove it. What does Anarchism stand for?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 08:56 PM
read any books? what is this a joke like the joke about an anarchist meeting?
I think the point CyM was trying to make was that your argument about why anarchists are either stupid or don&#39;t understand doesn&#39;t really make any sense.

Why are we stupid? What is it we don&#39;t understand?

I&#39;d also like to here that joke about the anarchist meeting please?


what could i learn from reading a book about anarchist that i dont already know

I would be interested to know what your definition of anarchism is?

[VukBZ2005]

Long Live Anarchism&#33;

[Pawn Power]

Long live communism, too&#33;

[Pawn Power]

we should fight for a revolution now and decide on communism and anarchy later
haha :P

[Guest1]

:lol: you can edit images you know. When you edit your post, you can choose another image or take it out completely :P

[Pawn Power]

thanks Che y Marijuana, now nobody will ever know of the mistake i made :D

[Donnie]

Thats means you have little faith in human nature. I believe in "nurture rather than nature". I belive that capitalism has made people greedy and has breed them greedy therefore i advocate the fact that in a Anarchist society, people would eventually get used to an Anarchist society.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I would never think true anarchy could work surley a group of people would be greedy and use organised crime and as a result opress the people.

That was the statement of the day.

1) greedy for what?

2) you can think whatever you want, but anarchism has been succesfully practiced. (We need to polish up our military skills though.)

3) people are not defenseless or helpless. They would defend themselves accordingly.

4) If you don&#39;t trust "human nature", then why do you trust people&#39;s lives to a leader. Wouldn&#39;t a leader be corrupted by his human nature and use his power for his own greedy desires. It doesn&#39;t make sense. Hierachies only worsen this problem. The most bastardous, powergreedy elements of society become leaders and direct society. What kinda society would a powergreedy bastard make? Dictatorship? USSR someone?

5) Authoritian socialists have had their turn. After a century of failures, it should be clear that it doesn&#39;t work. Nor in theory, nor in reality.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by Non&#045;Sectarian Bastard&#33;@Feb 9 2005, 02:12 PM
5) Authoritian socialists have had their turn. After a century of failures, it should be clear that it doesn&#39;t work. Nor in theory, nor in reality.
That was a rather sectarian comment of you, Non-Sectarian.

The "century of failures" that you speak are related to the industrial proleriat not being developed enough. Anarchism ESPECIALLY could never have solved these problems, because it does not have the capacity to force the industrialization of a society.

As for your referring to Spanish Anarcho-Syndicalism... it was relatively successful because it took place in Spain, which is far more industrialized than feudal Russia, or rural China. A system which did not intervene could never have brought the working class ahead through 300 years of development in a matter of a few short years.

Due to dialectics, the anarchists dependance on capitalism to "pre-develop" their countries for them is self-implosive. The countries that develop first, being the first world, will naturally have blurred class lines, and thus hinder any chance for an anarchist revolution in the first world. This is why we don&#39;t see anarchists ever having a real revolution, but rather taking over by chance when other regimes fall.

To depend on capitalism to pre-industrialize society for us so that we could have an anarchistic revolution would mean waiting for several hundred more years. We would have to wait for the third world to fully develop to the level that the USA is today. Else, anarchists would have to force the economy into the future, which they are fundamentally against. Therefore, the only viable option for us is to intervene and force society to industrialize so that we can hasten the great step forward to a classless and stateless society.