Anarchy anyone? - Gotta love/hate it!

[Hattori Hanzo]

I'm leaning to anarchy because the state oppresses every thing on the planet, but it also is horrible! Is anyone here an anarchist and do you have antthing to say against the state?

[man in the red suit]

i was an anarchist for a short time. then i saw the road warrior! Fuck no anarchy sux

[Mac OS Revolutionary]

Anarchy sucks. Spend a little time with some anarchists such as the people on www.anti-state.com and you will find out what I mean.

Here let me give you an example.

I am out of milk and I am also too lazy to go the corner shop buy some. Instead I shall go next door and kill my neighbor and take his milk. Guess what? Nobody cares!

[man in the red suit]

haha my point exactly

[Dynatos]

Anarchy sucks monkey dick! If anarchy ever did happen it would only last for a couple years befor some sort of government would emerge.

[man in the red suit]

exactly!!!! i am glad to be surrounded with smart ppl here!!

[Fabi]

whenever someone says something bout anarchy and how it'd be so great i just tell them that the system we live in now is a result of anarchy...
so i totally agree with Dynatos... cause we dont have to wonder.... it has already happened that way... ;)


(Edited by Fabi at 1:52 pm on May 12, 2002)

[Menshevik]

Why do you hate Anarchy, besides the fact that it sucks monkey dick?

[anarhosocijalist]

I like it.

[Dynatos]

Quote: from Menshevik on 4:02 pm on May 12, 2002
Why do you hate Anarchy, besides the fact that it sucks monkey dick?


I Hate it because every time there is no government theres always some people who trie and take advantage of other people and form some kind of crazy organization like the taliban.

[BOZG]

I Hate it because every time there is no government theres always some people who trie and take advantage of other people and form some kind of crazy organization like the taliban

But if one group attempts this, there will always be another group to counter it. As my friend always tells me, people will steal things and no one will care because there is no police force but in an anarchist society everyone is trully equal and no one has things better than anyone else. So for example, someone steals a tv and now has 2 tv's for themself while everyone else only has 1 tv for themself, I'm sure everyone else will be pissed off enough to go take that tv and give it back to it's rightful owner.

[Fabi]

yeah, and then hitler is gonna be born and say 'dont them jews have evrythn bettr thn we?' and then he's gonna kick someone's ass.... there are no jews? sorry, then women, men, children, black, white....
i dont really think that everyone would be equal...

as i already said... the system we have now is a direct result of anarchy...

[Mac OS Revolutionary]

Racism and seatshops would be rampart, there would be no government to supply welfare and much worse things. Think of anarchy as meal of corporatism hold the democracy.

In anarchy everything is owned privatly.

[Menshevik]

Anarchy is not chaos, Fabi, and the society we live in today is a result of chaos, not anarchy. Most anarchists do not believe in the philosophy "everyman for himself," but instead feel that loyalty to your community is most important. Under an Anarchist system whats good for you is good for society. As Zapatasguns mentioned earlier, equality is the incentive for harmony. The closest people have come to Anarchy is Communism, but Communist states have almost always ended in utter failure.
Capitalism is the source of all crime. Racism is a superiority complex that sprouts from capitalism. If there are no capitalists, there will be almost no crime. Everyone on this earth is bound by the same moral fiber and controlled by their conscience; some people choose to break away from their conscience and then commit a crime. More often than not these people try to rationalize their crime because the ends are so desirable e.g. money.
Anarchists belive that all evil lies in the state, and rightfully so. Governments have always despised Anarchists because of this radical belief--it would mean no more power. Unfortunately, hardly anyone chooses to look objectively at Anarchy just because it is different than all they've ever known--l'etat.

[sypher]

I used to anarchy because who i saw that represented it. however I now have a respect for the idea. I don't however, believe that it could ever work. (someone will create a government sooner or later)

[flames of the flag]

i was an anarchist very breifly, but i think that some governement is nessecary, not a governement in the sense of governing, in the sense of organizing planning and macking sure stuff goes smoothly. otherwise ppl just try to protect their own interests and screw each other over more so than they do in capitalism, thinking of it that way, can we even consider anarchists left?

(Edited by flames of the flag at 4:28 am on May 13, 2002)

[Fabi]

Anarchism:
Defined as:"political theory opposed to all forms of government. Anarchists believe that the highest attainment of humanity is the freedom of the individual to express himself, unhindered by any form of repression or control from without. The belief that all governments rest on violence to control their subjects"

--1984 Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia

(stole that from anarchy.org)

hey menshevik.. i never said anything about chaos... i think in the beginning there were no governments. and now we have ended up like this... however, i found your comment interesting... i did know that anarchy did not simply equal chaos... i might be wrong..... if you feel like it, try to prove me wrong...

there's another thing bout anarchy... dont parents count as 'government'? i think if you're somone's child then you're always under their influence... just as you're under the states' influence... and you feel loyal to your family... just like countries 'need' their patriots... do you know what i mean? maybe i made some mistake thinking about this...
again... always willing to learn...

aahh.. just remembered something else.... isnt the internet the perfect 'anarchy lab'? there are basically no rules... and look how some people abuse that... look at all kinds of different message boards where people, instead of contributing to the conversation, just behave like total morons a lot of times...
unfortunately a lot of times 'anarchy' does seem to lead to chaos.. or am i wrong?

i like a lot about anarchy.... but also there's stuff i dont like... i think the internet shouldnt be censored and changed around.. i hope the internet will stay the way it is a little longer.... on the other hand it already is changing...... search engines like altavista and google dont link you to certain sites.. (also some leftist-terrorism sites...) hmmm... what do you guys think?

[Freedom Fighter]

Mac OS Revolutionary - youre confusing anarchism (liberatarian socialism) with anarcho capitalism - anti-state.com is a anarcho capitalist site and it IS a joke - the anarchists on this site are against anarcho capitalism - and in anarchist society the collective voting of the people is the government(direct democracy) - true anarchist sites inc infoshop.org / anarchosyndicalism.org / http://flag.blackened.net - anarchists oppose capitalism, racism,sexism etc

[LeonardoDaVinci]

Well, like John Locke said: "Government is a necessary evil." I believe the reason for his argument is that moral virtue fails to determine and dominate the actions and behaviour of humans. So, until all our actions are determined by moral virtue, we will need government. Otherwise, we will always find ways for oppressing minorities and non-conformists.

[Fabi]

but arent the majority of the people stupid? this may sound really prejudice or dumb... but just take abortion..... if there would be direct democraty i think enough people would be stupid enough to NOT let women have an abortion.. (of course that argumetn is based on my opinion on abortion...)
or homosexuality... or whatever... what i mean is that all or at least many minorities would be totally fucked (xcuse me ;)) in a direct democracy...

[BOZG]

hey menshevik.. i never said anything about chaos... i think in the beginning there were no governments. and now we have ended up like this... however, i found your comment interesting... i did know that anarchy did not simply equal chaos... i might be wrong..... if you feel like it, try to prove me wrong...

there's another thing bout anarchy... dont parents count as 'government'? i think if you're somone's child then you're always under their influence... just as you're under the states' influence... and you feel loyal to your family... just like countries 'need' their patriots... do you know what i mean? maybe i made some mistake thinking about this...
again... always willing to learn...

aahh.. just remembered something else.... isnt the internet the perfect 'anarchy lab'? there are basically no rules... and look how some people abuse that... look at all kinds of different message boards where people, instead of contributing to the conversation, just behave like total morons a lot of times...
unfortunately a lot of times 'anarchy' does seem to lead to chaos.. or am i wrong?

i like a lot about anarchy.... but also there's stuff i dont like... i think the internet shouldnt be censored and changed around.. i hope the internet will stay the way it is a little longer.... on the other hand it already is changing...... search engines like altavista and google dont link you to certain sites.. (also some leftist-terrorism sites...) hmmm... what do you guys think?

Contrary to popular myth, anarchy is not a society where there is no rules. There is a popular anarchist slogan which goes 'Anarchy is not chaos - but order without control'. In an anarchistic society there are no laws etc to the point that it does not interfere with another person's civil liberties which means that things such as killing, sex abuse, stealing etc are all outlawed.

As for parents I agree, they are like a 'government' to the child which can be both a good and bad thing. If the parents are wise enough they will teach the child about bad things in the world. A child in need of a better word is 'stupid' to what they will now as they grow and they do need some rules to show them what is good and what is bad in society.

[Fabi]

but if you still cant kill and steal and stuff, what good is it? what if you believe that killing is good? what if someone's whole existance is based on the belief that killing is necessary?
yeah, i'd think it was wrong... but who am i to judge?

still not making too much sense i guess... ;)

[Valkyrie]

Here's an analogy that may or may not apply.

An unskilled worker, (the people) employed in any 'unprofessional' type job has his direct superior (the government) constantly looking over his shoulder telling him what to do next. The worker is constantly checking in and answering to this superior. His opinions, ideas, imput are not asked for, not heard and count for nothing. (Government v. the people)

A skilled and educated worker (the people) works as part of a team. (cooperative) She generally has a specialized position apart from her other co-workers, who also have specialized positions that they are specialized in!! (hahaha) Therefore, their input, creative opionions, and ideas are respected, encouraged and heard. They are not taking orders from a superior (government) because they are considered an equal and indispenably important part of the team contributing their specialized part in society. (Anarchy v. the Government)

[red senator]

Read the first chapter of lenin's "The State and Revolution" It might help you see the relationship between communism and anarchy.

[Valkyrie]

Furthermore, the worker (the people) who's input and ideas are considered is a happier and more productive human being and contributes great things to society.

ANARCHY!

[Valkyrie]

Who me????!!!!! I have read State and Revolution. I have it memorized.

[Menshevik]

An anarchist revolution would involve almost no violence. Violence plays the smallest role in a social revolution. After a practically non-violent overthrow, people aren't going to fall into a chaotic frenzy. At first some order is going to be needed, but after that, the pieced would fall into place by themselves. Anarchist revolution does not have to involve bomb-throwing or rioting, in fact I think it will be mostly peaceful. If we give humanity a chance and show how much happiness life can really contain, free from compulsion, people will see the light.

[red senator]

Quote: from Paris on 11:40 pm on May 13, 2002
Who me????!!!!! I have read State and Revolution. I have it memorized.


No, just anyone who wants to see the position of the communists in relation to that of the anarchists in the abolishment of the state.

I am just trying to let people see that Communism and anarchism have the same basic goal, they just go about it differently.

[Valkyrie]

Yeah, I wish people could have more faith in the people, and see that this can truly be carried out by the people, successfully and peacefully so.. instead of by some leader.

[Imperial Slave]

This is my first post, so I'm going to try not to be a bastard.
Anyways, I think that to make a blanket statement like "anarchy sucks" is misinformed to say the least. There are tons of political ideologies that stem from the base idea of anarchy, such as anarcho-syndicalism or autonomous collectivism, all of which share no small amount of commonallity with socialism, but that's not the point. Anarchy, in its truest interpretation, means literally "No Rulers". People are just conditioned in such a way as to assume that to not be subjugated is to live in a state of chaos and disarray. People say that without the state there is no law, and there is no human decency, leading the weak-minded to let loose the animalistic nature that drives us to establish hierarchical structure in the first place. I think that this is some sort of psychological fail-safe to keep us in line, because, as history has shown, revolutions tend only to bring violence and a new elite, leaving the ruling class intact, but with a new face. It is also blatantly untrue to say that in an anarchistic society there would be no law. There would be no ruling party to force their power structure on the masses, and that would leave them/us directionless and floundering, but that's why I, among with many others, advocate an evolutionary progression to anarchism that prepares people for it, rather than a revolution that throws the masses into a new system that is a carbon copy of the old.
On a more individual note, I believe that "human" existence these days is completely dominated, or rather, nullified by the external systems and cycles that we have trapped ourselves in. It seems to me that we only exist to proliferate a structural machine, and have thus ceased to be human. True anarchy, or existential anarchy, as I have called it, is revolution against this monstrosity, and the reclaiming of humanity. If people can rise to overcome this challenge, all other forms of authoritarianism and oppression will fall subsequently.
(Disclaimer: I may be stupid right now, I don't always know what I'm saying.)

[Valkyrie]

EXCELLENT!!!!!!!!!

After spewing the same old argument "it's not choas, it's not against rules, we don't think it will happen over night, read the FAQ".. etc etc. over and over and over again to the point of speechless exhaustion, I want to Thank you for coming here and saying it so refreashingly.

[Mac OS Revolutionary]

Sounds like bloody pipe dream. You will never, ever be able to have total anarchy. People will always impose leader or rulers.

[ZaPaTiStA SoCiAlIsTa]

I totally agree with imperial slave, what he said makes perfect sense. Although Mac Os said its a "pipe dream" how many ppl say that about our communism/socialism/Marxism/Leninism??? I think Mac Os couldn’t think of an argument to disprove imperial slave so he reverted back to capitalist defense mode: "IT WILL NEVER WORK, ITS A DREAM"

[Fabi]

can you just stop being dumb and calling everyone a capitalist who doesnt agree with you?
im not saying it wouldnt work, but i already made a few suggestions why it might not. and that there will be some 'government' and if it just be parents...

[Imperial Slave]

Mac OS Revolutionary Posted on 7:42 am on May 14, 2002
"Sounds like bloody pipe dream. You will never, ever be able to have total anarchy. People will always impose leader or rulers."

How quick we are to justify complacency. Kind of makes you think. Kind of proves me right about the "psychological fail-safe" too.

[Fabi]

okay.... i just had to dig this thread out again... for one, since there might be people interested in what anarchy is about... and what it's not about....

most importanly, however, i want to apologize for my ignorance, obviously revealed in some of my posts, regarding the theories and thoughts behind anarchism and libertarian socialism.

lately i have been reading more on anarchy/communism etc. and from what i know at the moment i do agree with a lot of things anarchy stands for...

again, i apologize and, as always in such cases, refer to my signature... unfortunately i'm not perfect... ;) ;)

[maoist3]

We Maoists are for dictatorship of the proletariat right
now, but anarchy is the long-run goal. Like Engels
said, the real difference with the anarchists is only
strategy.

Anarchists do not have dominant scientific thinkers
like Marx and Lenin, so they end up all over the place,
including a lot of pro-capitalist libertarians these days
calling themselves "anarchist." In my view there are
these total bourgeois faker anarchists, the
unaccountable anarchists and the pacifist-anarchists,
which are the only real ones.

Anyone who is for the use of organized force to achieve
social progress should be a Marxist, not an anarchist.
Like it or not, the use of organized force IS a state.
Those that deny it are simply unaccountable anarchists,
unaccountable to the masses of people the way a thief
who steals away in the night is. The use of unaccountable organized force is conducive to crime
much more than having accountable leaders--not that it matters, because unaccountable anarchists are usually
to unscientific to accomplish anything anyway.

[evil chris]

I'll restrain from having another largely poitless Anarchism debate - just a flying visit.

Mac OS Revolutionary
are you taking the fucking piss??
Anti state.com is a CAPITALIST site.You can tell this by the LAZZES FAIRE support buttons all over the shop.
As I have pointed out to you on atleast one other occation,Free Market Capitalism has fuck all to do with Anarchism,which is the Theory of voulntary assocation and Mutal Aid,free from corecive systems.
So stop being so fucking venal and atleast HAVE THE SLIGHTEST IDEA about what you're trying to slag off.

K?
K!