Originally posted by
[email protected] 28 2005, 10:07 PM
Not quite. The latter cannot logically exist whereas the former can (assuming that by dictator you are referring to someone who has permanent legal or so called "legitimate" authority over others; authority that is enforced through the use of violence).
Communism is entirely about giving 'society' (And thus the individuals within it) 'legitimate authority', via violence, over others!
This argument is also illogical. How could this be? We are shaped by our social environment -- we are born into it. Our interaction with this world will influence the way that we think and act. It is not the other way around. It is impossible to look at human beings without looking at society. The two are interrelated.
Or: This argument is also illogical. How could this be? Our social environemnt is shaped by us -- we cannot help but do it. Our interaction with this world will influence the way that society acts. It is not the other way around. It is impossible to look at society without looking at human beings. The two are interrelated.
Well that explains alot. Care to try to prove this?
If people aren't good
Then people are bad
SImple enough?
Most people aren't intentionally bad, they're just too stupid to understand their actions.
Tantamount to malfeasance though.
Well because outside of society, individuality is impossible, since one needs other people in order to develop and grow. That is, we are shaped by society but at the same time we can help shape and change aspects of that society by our actions and thoughts. If you value individuality, you must value society.
I mean the practical reason; the survival reason.
What role does it play in our survival?
In an unequal society, those with economic and political power will clearly have a significant advantage over others as they can use this power to influence and control them. That is the purpose of power.
Unequal defined how?
People can only come under the influence of power if they choose to. Why do people choose to be subservient? THeoretically, they could 'cast off their chains' any minute now; why don't they?
However in an anarchist society, such power would cease to exist, thus influence would not have to be coercive. Decisions would be made along democratic lines, replacing the coercive nature of the state.
Power cannot 'cease to exist', it can only be transferred: Power plays a specific role in a society. It has to, or else it wouldn't exist.
People with power have it for a reason, though not necessarly a wholly legimate one.
Not really?
Well, roughly .30 of the variance between individual behavior is attributed to 'society', mostly to your peer groups.
My friends are part of a society but we are friends because we want to be, that is -- we benefit from it.
You benefit from it? An oppurtunist are you?
None of use have legal or economic power over one another. No one "forces" anyone to do anything. Participation is voluntary.
Do you have friends?
Ever heard of 'peer pressure'?
And yes, of course.
I think about this sort of thing a lot though, why I desire what I desire and how it relates to those I know.
WHy do you want what you want?
Ofcourse there are "differences" in the sense that we are still living within a hierarchical, class-ridden society. However, would you care to elaborate on these differences? I just feel that they would differ slightly from mine. ;)
The differences are of relations.
In an anarchy, you have no formal relations with most of the members thus you don't care about most of the members.
This does not bode well for the society.
This is different.
Not different. Perhaps abberative, but not wholly different.
Domestic violence is based upon the nature of the patriarchal family which is structured to allow for power differentials where men dominate women.
Why did this family type develop?
The patriarchal structure of the nuclear family is the result of a capitalist economy
Nonsense.
Women have the advantage when it comes to mating. They can choose partners easily as there is a surfeit of them.
Men, in order to perpetuate themselves, found that subjugating a woman under your domain allowed you to not only spread your seed, but also to have a helpful servent.
This is all pre-capitalistic.
-- it creates and worsens the problem of domestic violence. Women are often financially dependent on men and responsible for looking after children, which often makes leaving violent relationships virtually impossible.
Perhaps.
But most of it seems to by psychological; kids who's parents beat them/their mother are likely to do it, for example.
I agree that power plays a role, yet this power must come from somewhere.
In this case, from human societal-evolution.
People usually hang around those that they get along with.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Please elaborate.
Human society evolved -- was not created -- for a reason, more accurately, reasons, too numerous to mention.
Society changes not because of any concious direction, but because the small changes in individual whims, directed, basically, survival.
Society exists to fulfill basic needs and it evolves to find the best way to meet those needs with the given technology and knowledge.
It can't be directed.