Volunteerism

[apathy maybe]

Volunteerism

Having just re-read this < http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28053> thread (on what makes an anarchist an anarchist) I had a thought that there is something missing in the Voluntarism section; that being part of the society has to be voluntary. Not only can you not be forced to take parts in things that you don’t agree with, you can’t be forced to be part of a society you disagree with. While this may lead to the creation of sub-societies, so long as they don’t threaten broader society and allow free movement, I don’t see a problem.

This is not a completely original idea, it comes from a story where the entire Solar System was anarchist (or Socialist as it was termed in the book) except for small communities of laissez faire capitalists.

I think that this concept of volunteerism is a fundamental part of being an Anarchist (and was one of the things which first lead me to it). But I&#39;ld like your ideas. What do you think? Should someone be allowed to ignore the societal norms and set up their own society?

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Apathy Maybe
Should someone be allowed to ignore the societal norms and set up their own society?

It would depend, wouldn&#39;t it?

What kind of "sub-society" would you want to permit? What do they actually do that&#39;s different from the larger society?

Your example of a "small community of capitalists" raises all kinds of thorny questions. What do they use for money? Are they completely self-sufficient? Who are the "workers" in those "communities"? How are they treated? Should we allow children to be raised in that kind of environment and indoctrinated with those kinds of ideas?

I think it possible and even likely that there will be a wide variety of sub-cultures in communist society...but I expect the differences will be cosmetic and not substantive...people will speak different languages, prepare foods in a distinctive fashion, enjoy different kinds of music, etc.

But they will still be communists.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Valkyrie]

The primitivists and the luddites should be allowed (I hate that word) to go off on their own, individually or in a group. They&#39;d be no threat in bringing capitalism into a communist society.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 02:39 PM
The primitivists and the luddites should be allowed (I hate that word) to go off on their own, individually or in a group. They&#39;d be no threat in bringing capitalism into a communist society.
I have no problem with adults who want to do that sort of thing...but we simply can&#39;t let them inflict that nonsense on their kids, can we?

I mean, is a baby to be condemned to a lifetime of savagery because of the bad luck in being born to people who&#39;ve chosen savagery?

So that means, most likely, that anyone who wanted to go be a savage would have to first submit to sterilization.

And won&#39;t that be "a can of worms"?

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Valkyrie]

Are primitivists savages?

[apathy maybe]

I would argue that savages are people that fight and kill others for no reason (or for no good reason). People who don&#39;t wish to use technology aren&#39;t savages.

A few preconditions for these people, to live separately, (what I would say),
1) They allow freedom of movement (between them and us).
2) They don&#39;t break human rights (including letting people starve).
3) They don&#39;t deny existence of or say bad shit about the broader society (well they could I guess, but no brainwashing kids).
4) They aren&#39;t a threat to the broader society.

Types of societies that I would have no problem with (so long as they followed the above), capitalism, some types of religious communities, primitivists and almost anyone else.

The idea being, that if someone wants to live in shitty place, they should be allowed to. Just like if someone likes being beaten, they should be allowed to. If at any point they don&#39;t want to be part of the sub society, they should be allowed to leave. Some people don&#39;t want to live in an equal society they like having masters and slaves. So long as all are all right with it, well they should be allowed to.

I understand your problem with these people having kids redstar2000, I don&#39;t really know how to deal with that. I guess (because freedom of movement is allowed) people from the broader society could make sure that bad things aren&#39;t happening and if they are the society could be shutdown. But I do think that sterilization is a bad idea.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Apathy Maybe+--> (Apathy Maybe)I would argue that savages are people that fight and kill others for no reason (or for no good reason). People who don&#39;t wish to use technology aren&#39;t savages.[/b]

Most unfair...you&#39;re using a moral definition of savagery.

Hunter/gatherers don&#39;t "fight and kill" for "no reason" or "no good reason". The absence of technology creates social norms consistent with that absence.

In pre-technological societies, different standards apply.


Valkyrie
Are primitivists savages?

The first ones wouldn&#39;t be; but if they were allowed to raise kids in that environment, subsequent generations certainly would be.

That&#39;s why I think such "sub-societies" would have to be "adults only".

And even then, there are some pretty nasty things that could happen in them if they were not closely watched.

Which is why I&#39;m pretty skeptical of the whole proposition.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Valkyrie]

Well, that was a rhetorical question, actually. I don&#39;t know any primitivists myself, but I can certainly see why they would want to get as far away of this fake, contrivied society with all it&#39;s ills, and never come back out again. The funny thing is... porn, not just porn but all kinds of deviant and violent porn against woman seems to be acceptable to a commuinist society, but not someone living in the woods fishing out of a stream. If I were to be steralizing anybody, It would be those fuckers who are downloading child porn incessantly over the internet, just waiting for an opportunity to strike in real life.

[Valkyrie]

By the way, not saying you Redstar... but I know some others feel that way.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Valkyrie
The funny thing is... porn, not just porn but all kinds of deviant and violent porn against woman seems to be acceptable to a communist society, but not someone living in the woods fishing out of a stream.

One person living in the woods fishing out of a stream is not a problem...if 50,000 people want to do that, then problems arise.

As to "porn", you know as well as I that one person&#39;s "erotica" is another person&#39;s "pornography". Since there would be no money to be made from it in communist society and thus no economic compulsion to take part in its production or distribution, whatever "porn" existed would presumably have been made by those who simply wanted to "show off" in some fashion (they&#39;d probably call it "art").

Horny teen-age males and a few curious teen-age females will probably have a look; most others will have too much going on in their own lives to bother.


If I were to be sterilizing anybody, it would be those fuckers who are downloading child porn incessantly over the internet, just waiting for an opportunity to strike in real life.

I don&#39;t think sterilization would be sufficient; you probably mean castration here.

Hormone therapy might work just as well; an implant that gradually releases a chemical which drastically lowers testosterone production might "do the trick"...produce a mental state in which the pedophile is simply no longer interested in sex.

It would have to be tested...

(Note that even the definition of pedophilia is highly controversial and may still be in communist society.)

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Valkyrie]

I gather the the main reason people leave their former society and go into the woods in the first place is to get AWAY from society, hence, people. In other words they want to be alone. not with 50,000 others. And I doubt if this very coddled society we live in even has 50,000 people resourceful enough to survive on their own outdoors, let alone would want to be deprived of their creature comforts. But if there were, and if they did want to form primitivist communities -- What harm are they presenting. There are indigenous and primitives culture now that live like that, that people aren&#39;t even aware of.

I have no problem with porn, except when the violent shit is acted out unconsensually in society. That is a problem. Much more so than the above.

[apathy maybe]

You notice how I would insist on freedom of movement. This would enable us to keep an eye on any thing that is going on. If bad things are happening, then it wouldn&#39;t be too hard to shut &#39;em down.