anarchism:a question

[rahul]

i learnt that anarchy is abolition of power and all are made equal with respect to every thing!( i dunno weather this is exactly correct).................

and it also seems anarchy just bans authority...


and so i imagined this revolutionary left..... to be anarchtic 4 a moment( with out admins and mods (i dunno weather my imagination is genuine )

whats the situation?

[SpeCtrE]

Man, You sure do have a great Imagination. Do you ever consider becoming a theoretical physict.

But, I think this was a question that came into my mind too. I think we should elect our mods and admins ourselves. Not the way they are right now

[rahul]

yeah

my parents ask me weather i wanna be a phisical scientist!

any how ............... lets wait for an answer! i dunno weather anarchism is good and trusted in all the cases

[seraphim]

anarchism is great in theory but would never work in practise. The weak would prey on the strong, the fortunate on the not so fortunate......................... so it would be no different to capitalism.

[Big_Don]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 10:09 AM
anarchism is great in theory but would never work in practise. The weak would prey on the strong, the fortunate on the not so fortunate......................... so it would be no different to capitalism.
Yep.... That will definitely be the outcome.

[Jonathan Edwards]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 10:09 AM
anarchism is great in theory but would never work in practise. The weak would prey on the strong, the fortunate on the not so fortunate......................... so it would be no different to capitalism.
I think you mean the bourgeoisie preying on the proletariat. But let me pose a conundrum, a riddle if you will: How can the bourgeoisie prey on the proletariat when they are providing the proletariat with a job?

All communism, and anarchism, does is punish the entreprenuers of a country because they had the smarts to form a successful business. Those that propose communism are those that are afraid of being left behind by social Darwinism.

So don't fret. I realize that yours is a desperation move.

[Anarchist Freedom]

Rahul you have to realize this is a private message board and Really they way mods are chosen now is by election we just recently had a huge election and got a bunch of new mods.


mmm no state sounds like fun to me baby

[rahul]

AF ... yeah i knew its by election .............. elected by CC thats really fair abou RL

Do you mean anarchism supports election __ the views of majority ............... ?

i thought anarchy doent even support electing some 1 on the basis of majority

[amusing foibles]

Anarchism itself is no different from the "end stage" of communism (no state, "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need"), it simply differs in [how long it takes to get that point- communists advocate a "dictatorship of the proletariat" (socialism) stage after the revolution and before pure communism, rather than cutting straight to the chase.

So what is your issue with anarchism? If you don't think it'll work, how will communism work? Or will socialism simply last indefinately?


EDIT: to someone who knows: Does the CC vote in new mods by majority rule or by some sort of consensus-based-decision-making scheme? As much as I love consensus based, I can understand how that might be a little hard over the internet...

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

1 - there's nothing unanarchistic about Che-Lives/RevLeft, because participation is completely voluntary. Anarchism doesn't mean the abolishion of rules -just chosing which rules you want to live be and under what circumstances. Imagine, for a moment, that Che-Lives/RevLeft is like a soccer game. You willingly hand play by the rules, and follow the structures as long as you want, and, if you don't dig it, then you can stop playing soccer, and nobody is going to force you back into the game.

2 - Anarchism is about consent, and allowing people to construct whatever is circumstantially desirable.

[Donnie]

So let me get this. Anarchists dont believe in goverment laws, becuase they believe that they were never consulted by which law to pass. They just say we are born into society and expected to conform without any debate. And so in a sort of Anarcho-communist society, Anarchist sort of like get together within a commune and discuss what laws they should have by Direct Democracy? Is this how an Anarcho-communist society would work?

And that people would collectivse the land by a discussion with all the people in the commune? So people would basically trade on a benifical basis within and outside the commune? Is that how it would work?

[Guest1]

Except the trade would probably also take the form of gift economics, as we believe communist economics is a natural progression.

But yes, basically, no rulers, but not no rules.

As for RevLeft, this is a private forum. This is also not a country.

Yes, organizationally, Anarchist modes of organization would be preferable, but technologically, none of us has the skills to make board software from the ground up that would accomodate such a system.

Board software generally reflects the assumptions of this system, that one cannot function non-hierarchily. And thus, one currently can't function non-hierarchily on the site. But we do our best to democratize it, within the limits of technology, and the limits that, again, this is not a country.

[NYer565]

Anarchy is fascism, minus the government.

[NovelGentry]

Anarchy is fascism, minus the government.

An intelligent and informed reply.

[NYer565]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2005, 10:41 PM

Anarchy is fascism, minus the government.

An intelligent and informed reply.
Do I sense sarcasm? <_<

[NovelGentry]

Do I sense sarcasm?

Only if you can sense.

[Guest1]

No, not at all, it was very well thought out, listing all the similarities between the movement that lost thousands fighting Fascism, and... Fascism.

Your logic astounded us.

[NYer565]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2005, 10:51 PM

Do I sense sarcasm?

Only if you can sense.
:lol:

I was just trying to point out that neither system gives people freedoms. In fascism the government takes them away, and in anarchy they&#39;re taken away by other people who may disagree with you or just not like you.

[NovelGentry]

I was just trying to point out that neither system gives people freedoms. In fascism the government takes them away, and in anarchy they&#39;re taken away by other people who may disagree with you or just not like you.

This only shows your ignorance of the system itself, not that this is what actually happens.

[NYer565]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2005, 11:04 PM

I was just trying to point out that neither system gives people freedoms. In fascism the government takes them away, and in anarchy they&#39;re taken away by other people who may disagree with you or just not like you.

This only shows your ignorance of the system itself, not that this is what actually happens.
Ok.

Can I ask you...in anarchy, what stops people from infringing on other&#39;s rights?

[NovelGentry]

What stops that from happening in any society? People. People willing to defend themselves and defend other people as well.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

The people themselves. You see, in anarchism when someone tries to put authority over others, there are people&#39;s militia&#39;s for protection, who will shoot, if necessary, on the attacker. Even individuals can protect themselves against other people.

But I am quoting you, man I haven&#39;t laughed this hard in ages.


Anarchy is fascism, minus the government.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Edit: I still can&#39;t stop laughing :lol:

Anyway I made one too, for the books.


Choclate is brown, minus the browness

[NYer565]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2005, 11:17 PM
What stops that from happening in any society? People. People willing to defend themselves and defend other people as well.
That&#39;s assuming alot out of people. I don&#39;t think human nature is that good.

[NovelGentry]

I don&#39;t think human nature is that good.

I don&#39;t think human nature has anything to do with being good or bad. So I guess we&#39;re even.

[Morpheus]

I don&#39;t think human nature is that good

If human nature is bad then you should oppose hierarchy because the people on top will just abuse it. Besides, doing what Non-Sectarian Bastard is in our own selfish interests.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I don&#39;t understand why people consider the "human nature" argument a plus for hierachy. If the human is really so corrupt and greedy, then why would you trust the lives of people to such a "corrupt and greedy" being?

On top of that hierachies worsen this problem. The most powergreedy elements of society make it to leader. And it&#39;s known in psychology that powergreed doesn&#39;t testify of a "friendly" person.

Basicly, the most corrupt powergreedy bastards, become leaders. You can&#39;t expect a powergreedy bastard to let the state "wither" away, or even to loosen his powergrip.

What a "way" to construct a classless society. :rolleyes: No wonder, all the Leninist experiments failed. More often to "internal problems", then pressure from the outside.

[rahul]

the idea that got in to my brain through this thread--- www.vr4thepeople.tk

register there and support my expertment........there all are admins.....no root admin i just moved myself(creator of this board) in to a group of other members(named as anarci&#092;admin)...........so continuing my experiment with 5 guys over there.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

It&#39;s probable that your experiment will fail. 1) not everyone who joins your board has the right motives 2) these individuals will abuse the power that you give them 3) there isn&#39;t a clear board policy

So, don&#39;t blame anarchism if your board fails.

[rahul]

OK .......... i knew it.
i am taking care to popularise this board only in left forums .... RL

so the chances for others {other than leftists} is minimised.....

and even if other nazi kind of groups join we will see that they cant access other options in management of the boards.
and even if they can administer.........whats there its just an experiment.

but now i feel there will be a great threat from other right groups...
so now i am going to do is setup a root admin but i will not be using that account.......until some emergency

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Make a decisionmaking forum, where everyone is allowed. Where suggestions are made and voted on. Also elect delegates who carry out the decisions made by the forummembers, but the delegates are not allowed to act on their own. Furthermore, make a clear board policy.

[rahul]

but this forum is just an experimentation..........and so let me see how it works..........i mean giving power to every1 in the board......you are also invited there ( www.vr4thepeople.tk )to take part in my experiment....

what&#39;s there if some one does some irrepairable changes on that board?
thats the question to be answered in future...&#33;

if that really happens.....let me feel that " the experiment of mine is almost at its end and its quiet a successfull one.(since i got that result....the worst result`)"

[Ele'ill]

what would stop bartering from happening. Which would put more significance on certain items. People could horde items, which would take the place of currency. Drug trade would essentially die off in an anarchist society but what about a nice big plow for an eightball. What is to stop a group of people from forming a community, and that community then evolving into democracy, or any similar form of heirarchy. In america for example, we live in a densely populated area, I would assume the majority of the people wouldn&#39;t except anarchism....this would pose a problem.

Enlighten me.

[bunk]

Democracy does not assume hierachy.

[Ele'ill]

Ok, forget that example and use your imagination..

[Super Mario Conspiracy]

The real question would be if anarchy would "survive" if it was implemented tomorrow worldwide.

You see, go back 500 years, and consider yourself a liberal. You wouldn&#39;t find any "socialists" because the closest thing to socialism was capitalism.

The thing is, some people are ready for communism, but most are not. They&#39;re not ready to be friendly and helpful towards each other. That is why I think the transission-system helps, from capitalism to socialism, to communism and finally to anarchism (in a sence).

What would happen to the mafia? To the neonazis, the fascists if anarchy would be implemented right away? They would go for a grip on power. And since, as far as I understand it, anarchism doesn&#39;t force anyone into anything, including defending other people, wouldn&#39;t it be relatively easy for these groups to get their power?

Second, the state may seem terrifying at first, but it also depends on what the state is. Is it democratic? A fascist state? And so on. In socialism, people actively watch their government. If a person misuses his or her powers, you have the right to vote this person out. Besides, how could this person misuse his or her power when the person has to obide by the will of the people?

[Ele'ill]

by controlling the media for the specific purpose of misleading the public into thinking a certain &#39;thing&#39; then when they say &#39;HEY LETS ACT ON THAT, THAT ISN&#39;T RIGHT&#39; that person in power says, &#39;ok&#39;. Yeah ok the media is controlled by the people too yeah well it&#39;s basically the same today. There will always be corruption in every system of government even in the systems lacking a government, you will have corruption.

[Super Mario Conspiracy]

There will always be corruption in every system of government even in the systems lacking a government, you will have corruption.

Corruption is a "side-effect" of power - absolute power corrupts absolutely, so to speak.

If we want to live in a world free of corruption, crime and other things that we simply don&#39;t want - we have to live in such a system. But we&#39;re all tought to be good and happy when we were young and around at the kindergarten.

Then we grow up and see the world as it is. Corruption is like a cancer, it spreads. When everything just goes wrong for you, you USE corruption to survive.

And as I mentioned, corruption comes out of power. That is why we have to "reload" the world, so to speak, to not just learn what is right and wrong, but to actually live like that. Because corruption isn&#39;t only on the "criminal side", it&#39;s everywhere in the legal system too.

Which is why we all have chose socialism (I hope) - because when everybody has the power, no one can be corrupted in such a sence to corrupt and destroy society for everybody else.

[Ele'ill]

It seems that everyone talks about the end, finished result of a political theory. I would be very happy in an anarchist society. The means to getting there is what worries me. The means to getting there is much different then being in an already existant system, and trying to sustain it. And I am not as much talking about a means through revolution, I am talking about post revolution where the masses are &#39;aimless&#39; &#39;masterless&#39; ect.. In a small community, it might be easy, but in a densely populated area such as america, corruption would be a very large issue. You are right, corruption comes from power but that simply shifts the conversation to, how would you prevent power?