A mess of thought!

[The Feral Underclass]

Idealism.
i·de·al·ism
1. The act or practice of envisioning things in an ideal form.
Pursuit of one's ideals.
2. Idealized treatment of a subject in literature or art.
3. Philosophy. The theory that the object of external perception, in itself or as perceived, consists of ideas.

I have noticed on this board and indeed in the real world that the word idealism is used as a term of offence rather than a founded political statement. A term of offence propagated by Lenin and then picked up and used at will by his adherent and loyal followers, even 85 years after his death.

I assume that when leninists or anyone else for that matter use the word idealist they do so because they believe that anarchism is unrealistic or anti-materialist, but they use the word incorrectly. Being idealistic does not negate realism, it is simply a train of thought that "enivisons things in an ideal form." That being something which is perfect, and the fact we can percieve perfection means that we can create it.

However, the world exists in a material form. There are material things which exist and which create other things. Situations, conditions etc that we as material beings live under. Those material realities have created unmaterial concepts which exist in our brain, greed, alienation and authority. Anarchism seeks to destory those unmaterial concepts about humanity and create a logical system based on our material realities. Meaning that we understand the world around us and therefore create a logical way to sustain ourselves within it....unmaterialist? Well, leninists obviously think so. They're solution to this problem is to use the concepts which we want to destroy in order to destroy them? This isnt logical. You can not use an unmaterial approach to achieve a material fact. The concept of authority is an unmaterial concept created by an illogical system. How can you then use that to create a world without authority? Surely it is this which is unmaterialist?

-------------------------------------------

Broken down extremly simply anarchism can be explained thus...

Capitalism creates exploitation, oppression and does not sustain humanity logically
No one wants to be exploited and oppressed
We change that by changing the system
Only the exploited and oppressed can create that system because those who are not exploited and oppressed don't want it to change (why would they)
They can only do that by destroying the present system
We create the new system by being democratic, respectful, fair and mutually co-operative human beings.

I can see that this is an ideal, but why is it unrealistic or unmaterialist?

[percept¡on]

Being idealistic does not negate realism, it is simply a train of thought that "enivisons things in an ideal form." That being something which is perfect, and the fact we can percieve perfection means that we can create it.

Except that idealism isn't about perfection, only the 'ideal', or the highest point we as human beings can reasonably be expected to aspire to. Everyone has some concept of the ideal for humanity, just some are more pessimistic than others. Capitalists think that this is the best we can do, Leninists think we can achieve a more perfect society only with the help of a benevolent leadership, Anarchists believe we can achieve a more perfect society 'by ourselves'.


We create the new system by being democratic, respectful, fair and mutually co-operative human beings.

I can see that this is an ideal, but why is it unrealistic or unmaterialist?

Actually it is unmaterialist, in that you are saying that by being "democratic, respectful, fair and mutually cooperative" beings we can create a system which is these things. If you reverse it, and say that we can create a system that fosters these attributes and these attributes would be as natural to man as greed and apathy are in the current system, that would be a materialist viewpoint. Maybe I'm off, but in my pov materialism is the idea that your conditions of existence influence your character, not that through your character you can influence your conditions of existence.

[apathy maybe]

I am proud to call my self an Idealist. Aim for the ideal, and any step closer is better then what we had before. This is why pushing for reforms of the present system is needed, as well as (when the time comes) destroying it completely.

[elijahcraig]

Broken down extremly simply anarchism can be explained thus...

Capitalism creates exploitation, oppression and does not sustain humanity logically

Capitalism didn't create these things; they have existed since the beginning of humankind.


No one wants to be exploited and oppressed

Sacher-Masoch and hoardes of others would disagree. Christians and all simple minded people have an unconscious want to be oppressed in their need for simple answers for complex questions.


We change that by changing the system
Only the exploited and oppressed can create that system because those who are not exploited and oppressed don't want it to change (why would they)

The system changing won't eliminate oppression, ridiculous and utopian to think so.


They can only do that by destroying the present system
We create the new system by being democratic, respectful, fair and mutually co-operative human beings.

Also utopianism.


I can see that this is an ideal, but why is it unrealistic or unmaterialist?

If it's idealistic, it voids the other two.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 07:30 AM
Capitalism didn't create these things; they have existed since the beginning of humankind.


Are you trying to disprove my assertion that capitalism creates exploitation and oppession, or are you just stating a fact?


Sacher-Masoch and hoardes of others would disagree. Christians and all simple minded people have an unconscious want to be oppressed in their need for simple answers for complex questions.

Human beings always search for answers to things they think are irrational. Usually by using irrational explinations. "I exist, therefore there must be god." That dosnt mean that people want to be oppressed or exploited. It simply means that we, as conscious animals, feel an urge to understand our consciousness!


The system changing won't eliminate oppression, ridiculous and utopian to think so

"They call me a utopianist. They are the hindrance which makes this utopia unrealisable."

There is no such this as "utipianism" except for people who have a different agenda.


Also utopianism.

Again, utopianism doesnt exist. If you can concieve something, then you can create it. If you can concieve of the idea of democracy and respect then you are able to carry the act out.


If it's idealistic, it voids the other two.

But idealism doesnt mean what you want it to mean. Even in the philosophic sense it doesnt mean what you want it to mean. Idealism is just the pursuit of an ideal.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by percept¡[email protected] 5 2004, 07:39 PM
Actually it is unmaterialist, in that you are saying that by being "democratic, respectful, fair and mutually cooperative" beings we can create a system which is these things.

It's a start.


materialism is the idea that yor conditions of existence influence your character, not that through your character you can influence your conditions of existence.

I dont think that being democratic and respectful etc is going to create a society based on those things. But in order to see through lasting change, these things will have to be adopted.

[elijahcraig]

Are you trying to disprove my assertion that capitalism creates exploitation and oppession, or are you just stating a fact?

Both.


Human beings always search for answers to things they think are irrational. Usually by using irrational explinations. "I exist, therefore there must be god." That dosnt mean that people want to be oppressed or exploited. It simply means that we, as conscious animals, feel an urge to understand our consciousness!

No, irrationality is an urge to be free of the burden of reality.


"They call me a utopianist. They are the hindrance which makes this utopia unrealisable."

There is no such this as "utipianism" except for people who have a different agenda.

Utopianism in the sense that the system people invision NEVER comes to be—it always takes on a form which usually leads to another “problem” for future people to complain about.

Claiming there is no such thing as a utopian idealism is ridiculous…Robert Owen…William Godwin…for example…


[ Again, utopianism doesnt exist. If you can concieve something, then you can create it. If you can concieve of the idea of democracy and respect then you are able to carry the act out.

If I conceive of the idea of a pink elephant living in my colon and controlling every movement of the entire society…does this mean I can create this as a reality? No; it don’t. Your statements are ridiculous Chomskyian nonsense.


But idealism doesnt mean what you want it to mean. Even in the philosophic sense it doesnt mean what you want it to mean. Idealism is just the pursuit of an ideal.

This “debate” is over as far as I’m concerned—you’re simply attempting to reconcile two things, idealism and materialism, which are irreconcilable.

I haven’t “made” up any definition for idealism—I have merely accepted the normal accepted version and debated. You have not provided an alternate definition, you’ve only pandered around and talked yourself into a nonsensical position, and, I must say, a quite embarrassing situation.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 09:55 AM
Both.
So you claim that capitalism doesnt create exploitation and oppression?


Utopianism in the sense that the system people invision NEVER comes to be—it always takes on a form which usually leads to another “problem” for future people to complain about.

That's a question of commitment and dedication.


Claiming there is no such thing as a utopian idealism is ridiculous…Robert Owen…William Godwin…for example…

You throw the word around as a term of offence. There are utopian ideals I agree.



If I conceive of the idea of a pink elephant living in my colon and controlling every movement of the entire society…does this mean I can create this as a reality? No; it don’t. Your statements are ridiculous Chomskyian nonsense.

But believing in punk elephants living in your colon and controlling every movement of the entire society is ilogical. Wanting to live in a democratic and respectful society is not.


This “debate” is over as far as I’m concerned—you’re simply attempting to reconcile two things, idealism and materialism, which are irreconcilable.

I think you can want an ideal which is utopian and be materialistic about your approach. I think those two things are reconcilable and as of yet, you haven't told me why that isnt the case.


I haven’t “made” up any definition for idealism—I have merely accepted the normal accepted version and debated. You have not provided an alternate definition, you’ve only pandered around and talked yourself into a nonsensical position, and, I must say, a quite embarrassing situation.

You use the term idealism as a term of offence, meaning unrealistic and unmaterialistic, but that isn't what idealism is. That's just people who have certain agendas trying to undermine ideas which threaten them.

As for being nonsensical, I admit that might be the case...hence the title. Being embarresed? :rolleyes: This is a learning experience, and I really dont get embarresed at trying to learn, on an internet message board, with people I have never met.

[percept¡on]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 7 2004, 08:33 AM

So you claim that capitalism doesnt create exploitation and oppression?

I think it would be more correct to say it nurtures or encourages, or even facilitates, but exploitation and oppression long preceded capitalism.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by percept¡on+Jun 7 2004, 06:52 PM--> (percept¡on @ Jun 7 2004, 06:52 PM)
The Anarchist [email protected] 7 2004, 08:33 AM

So you claim that capitalism doesnt create exploitation and oppression?

I think it would be more correct to say it nurtures or encourages, or even facilitates, but exploitation and oppression long preceded capitalism. [/b]
Ok, so instead of using the word "creates" which by it's plural nature denoates present day, I will replace it with nurtures and facilitates....i mean really :rolleyes:

[elijahcraig]

o you claim that capitalism doesnt create exploitation and oppression?

I claim these two things existed from the beginning of mankind, and capitalism merely is another form of that.


That's a question of commitment and dedication.

No, it’s not. The revolutionaries in France had “commitment and dedication”—there idealized system failed as all idealized systems fail.


You throw the word around as a term of offence. There are utopian ideals I agree.

I am not necessarily saying that it is “bad” to agree with these ideals—I am saying that a revolution based on utopian ideals will not amount to much more than a material condition of unwanted status.


But believing in punk elephants living in your colon and controlling every movement of the entire society is ilogical. Wanting to live in a democratic and respectful society is not.

I don’t want to live in a respectful society, and I hope any one who dislikes pathetic people who whine about being “offended” should agree. Democracy? I could live with it or without it. I don’t believe it will ever exist in any substantial form.

Actually, many people believe weird things like I just said—Christians have their Heaven, Anarchists their utopian future.


I think you can want an ideal which is utopian and be materialistic about your approach. I think those two things are reconcilable and as of yet, you haven't told me why that isnt the case.

Thinking that these things will come about because you “will them to” is not materialistic.


You use the term idealism as a term of offence, meaning unrealistic and unmaterialistic, but that isn't what idealism is. That's just people who have certain agendas trying to undermine ideas which threaten them.


I don’t “make up” things to serve an agenda. I am merely voicing the same voices which have attacked idealism from a materialist standpoint for the past century and a half or so, starting mainly with Marx.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 10:55 PM
I claim these two things existed from the beginning of mankind, and capitalism merely is another form of that.
I know.


No, it’s not. The revolutionaries in France had “commitment and dedication”—there idealized system failed as all idealized systems fail.

We'll see wont we..


I don’t want to live in a respectful society, and I hope any one who dislikes pathetic people who whine about being “offended” should agree.

:blink:


Democracy? I could live with it or without it. I don’t believe it will ever exist in any substantial form.

:blink:


I don’t “make up” things to serve an agenda. I am merely voicing the same voices which have attacked idealism from a materialist standpoint for the past century and a half or so, starting mainly with Marx.

You havent done anything of the sort.

[elijahcraig]

You didn't much respond, so I'll just not post anything else really...you might want to read Marx/Engels' section in the Manifesto, for starters, on Scientific Socialism vs Utopian Socialism.

It's a start, and you need one.

[gaf]

only idealists could ,and have, and will ,change the world.because they could,have and will dream
don't need manifesto for it or starters mode :ph34r:

[gaf]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 11:50 PM


It's a start, and you need one.
arrogance that's all i see
when did you start and are you finished(because one day you will be man)
do you have own dream?

[elijahcraig]

Tone down the gay sounding slogantalk, buddy.

[gaf]

sounds like you want but the tone is here. budy

[elijahcraig]

?

Not sure what that means.