why is anarcism so popular - I don't understand why young pe

[peterson2k4]

The way I see it Anarcy can never happen again unless EVERY 1st world country is destroyed. If this dosen't happen some other country will take over the land that the anarcist have. Even if anarcy did exist it couldn't last very long. Someone would eventually rise up and creat some kind of government. So why do people beleave in it?

Is Anarcy a way for teenagers to rebel against their community, School and social standards? Is it so the angry youth of america has something to shock their families at the dinner table and say in a ignorent tone "Fuck all Athority!?"

If I am incorrect in any way please set me straight.

[CPK]

well some anarchists are only anarchists because it's the music they listen too, and/or just hate authority.
but not all of them...

[CommieBastard]

Anarchy: The political beleif that no authority is valid unless fully consented to without an element of coercion.

I think that's just about the best defininition of it you will get.
Because of it's nature it is very popular with teenagers within a society which represses them...
but you must remember that the support of an ideology does not define that ideology. It is much more than simple minded rebellion, much much more.
Marx even alluded to an eventual anarchism, as has already been said in this forum section i beleive, when he said that the state will eventual wither away when the workers have full control of the means of production.

[vox]

peterson2k4,

You may be interested in a recent article in the Monthly Review about anarchism and the anti-globalization movements:

http://www.monthlyreview.org/0901epstein.htm

vox

[Proteus]

Anarchism is an Ideology similar to Communism but based in different filosofical theory.
Anarchism as massive movement died at the begining of the 20th century.
A branc of Anarchism, The Self Anarchism, establish as the way to complain some non-Marxist lads mostly by the called high-society. Argument of everithing, bad constitution, drugs and others is their "revolutionary" action. Of course there are and exceptions but nothing more.
True Anarchism is a very respectful theory that its name has been stolen and used by people that don' know anything about Marxism, Anarchism of Philosofy.
This is my first message to your forum and I please you to excuse me for my mistakes in the use of English language.

[Moskitto]

aren't there anarchists who believe that government stops capitalism so want to destroy government to help capitalism.

[gunnarSUmedlem]

My version of anarchy: Everybody should do what they want, except if it hurts another people. Nobody are worth more than others.

This sounds good. I am an anarchist. But I know it's not possible. But anarchy is the best Utopia. Therefore many young people choose anarchism.

[CommieBastard]

Moskitto, yes, there are. You see, as with all ideologies, within anarchism there is a whole spectrum of beleif. In fact, a spectrum cannot define it, as neither cna terms such as anarchism. Pigeon-holing people like this is altogether inadequate...
anyway, there are Anarcho-Capitalists, people who beleive in a free market capitalism to an EXTREME. Such a system, however, would not involve companies, organisations or trans-nationals. Rather, they beleive each person should own their own means of production, and therefore benefit in a way that represents their abilities. What this doesnt take account of is that people might happen to be in an area where there abilities are more useful at resource gathering than in others..
then again, there are problems with EVERY ideology.
I have to say, though i dislike anarcho-capitalism, and think it a twisting of true anarchist principles, i think it's better than what we have now...

[ChineseRedFist]

It is very distressing to me to see that anarchism has taken the stage as a status symbol, rather than an actual anti-politika belief. In my university Political Science we were recently given a 50 question survey which was meant to test our political beliefs, on the radical to reactionary scale. Living in Idaho (Republican Paradise), it was no surprise that the average score was 259, with 300 being full blown reactionary. I had the lowest score with a 54. Keep in mind the questions involved ratings of Disagree to strongly disagree on a scale of 1-10. So the lowest score possible was a 50. However, there was a student who posted a score of 67. When asked what his political beliefs were, he replied "Anarchist." This drew my attention. After class, I decided I would speak to this man and ask of him some questions. As it turned out, he knew NOTHING about what I was asking, and was just another "Anarchist for shock value." Of all the people who claim to be anarchists, in my experiences, only about 2% turn out to truly be. The other 98% just use it as a label to seem more radical than they are. As proof, we were given another, more intense survey this time by our professor to check the validity of the first survey. If scores were relatively the same, that proved the validity of the scores, and also the honesty of the respondents. I myself posted a 52 this time, and the fellow who claimed to be an anarachist had a 135, which is ten points above average on the reactionary side.

[CommieBastard]

I did a similar test in politics class.
The one i did was decidedly out of date, and you basically had to be a christian to be extreme left wing...
it was on a basis of reactionary-revolutionary and liberal-authoritarian. I was liberal and (if the test hadnt been biased) revolutionary, basically placing me as an anarcho-communist, which i am.

[Jurhael]

Hmm...wish I could take one of those tests...the ones I find online can be very biased...even the political compass one...

http://www.politicalcompass.org


I get anywhere from -4.94 to -1.88 on the economics side, which puts me on the left, but CENTER-left.

And -6.52-- -6.77 on the Libertarian/Authoritarian side which gives me a strong Libertarian streak.

But it's biased... :(

[CommieBastard]

just did that test, i got
economic left/right -7.13
Authoritarian/Libertarian -7.59

im more left and liberal than gandhi :D

[Nickademus]

Quote: from CommieBastard on 12:48 am on Oct. 12, 2001
just did that test, i got
economic left/right -7.13
Authoritarian/Libertarian -7.59

im more left and liberal than gandhi :D

yeah i just did the test too. it's interesting.
these are my results:
econ left/right -6.50
auth/liber -8.10

that puts me left of ghandi too

[Jurhael]

You're all a bunch a COMMIES! ;)

[vox]

This is at least the third time I've taken this test. Tonight I got:

Economic Left/Right: -7.88
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -7.64

vox

[Jurhael]

Hmmm...yea, yours fluctates, but mine fluctuates a LOT...

Scary...but that just proves that I'm hardly entrenched in any idealogy. heh

[ProletariatRobot]

Hello, this is my first post. But I have JUST started learning about anarchism, and the book i'm reading is "what is communist anarchism?" I don't know the difference between anarchism and communist anarchism, but the theory of communist anarchism is very different than what I imagined. I got this free book for Rage Against the Machine's website. I'll give you the link to the book. By the way, the basic analysis is in the Introduction, and then it goes in more depth, so I reccomend starting with it.

Here is the link: http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archi...whatis_toc.html (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)

If that doesn't work, go to www.ratm.com and click on reading list, and then somewhere on there, it says "what is communist anarchism" in green, and click that. All the green books are free.

[pce]

that's pretty cool

i got

Economic Left/Right: -7.63
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -7.64

[CommieBastard]

i did it again and got -7.88 (left/right)
and -8.05 (libertarian)

[Jurhael]

This time:

Economic Left/Right: -4.38
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -6.10

(Guess I didn't strongly disagree enough in certain libertarian questions...ehhee)

[RedCeltic]

Economic Left/Right: -7.13
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -6.41

[Anonymous]

cool test! thanks jurhael:)

i got:
econ right/left =6.75
authoritarian/libertatian=7.65

thats cool!

[red head]

good survey. i got: eco: -6.88 libertarian: -8.92

[Moskitto]

I got

"Access denied to this server"

:confused:

[peterson2k4]

as did I!

[red warlock]

[quote]Quote: from CPK on 3:23 am on Oct. 6, 2001
well some anarchists are only anarchists because it's the music they listen too, and/or just hate authority.
but not all of them...

[well,you may saythat again comrade!!they don't have anything to do with a particular ideology..they are just not content with what they have ...so,they protest-clothes,music-acts...so on..
they don't have any perspective.

[fightthepower]

I, too am an anarchist. I've read all of the posts here, and there's a good amount of "Anarchy would never really work". It has worked, not just in scattered communes, but on large scales. There are a lot of examples and explanations of anarchist principles at:

www.infoshop.org/index/faq.htm

Anarcha- capitalism is oxymoronic. Capitalism, whatever the form, creates heirarchy.

An anarchy wouldn't really be a utopia, since utopias are ultumately unattainable. An anarchist society would still have all the hopes, fears, pains, and dreams that are common to humans. (ie "i love you, but you dont love me= pain).

I took the political compass test at least a month ago, and I dont remember my exact result, but I was below and to the left of Gandhi.

I'm relatively new here, and i really like having a place to have contact with other leftists. I hope to learn as much as possible while I'm here.

Until later,

[MiNdGaMe]

Many so called anarchists are posers, often poser punks, who say anarchy and completely go against its basic principles (racism, homophobia, sexism etc..). Its really their fault their victims of the system, when we are born into this world, we do not know of racism, homophobia, sexism etc.. nor do we say such comments eg. gay this gay that. Its often through television, parents or peer groups that we become that racist, homophobic, sexist, captialist that we were...

[MiNdGaMe]

My Political Compass Results:

Economic Left/Right: -5.38
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -9.13

[stalinorgel]

Hi!

Because the Communist Parties are not attractive for young people's. There are to much old people's in CP's.

Rotfront!

[JoYKiLLaH]

kids run aorund my jr high sayign anarchism is cool, i think they just like the fuckin name, lol,

anarchism is straight to classless society, communism is progressing to classless.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

What Joykillah said, ,Anarchy is straight to classless, which wouldn't work unless (according to one anarchist I spoke to) there existed a very evolved mentality among the people, which is a crap-excuse. Anarchy is in favor of de-centralizing the government, which is another crap-theory that will never work, read Lenin for further reasons why.

Young Americans like to rebel, everyonce in a while you'll get one or two who wanna learn more, sometimes these mere children will develope a likeness for Anarchy without understanding other, more effective Socialist movements.

[RGacky3]

Anarchy in my opinion can work in small groups or communities, if every one in that community was an anarchist. but as for the whole world, that could never happen, and if it did, every one would die. Any way the reason many teens are anarchists now is because its COOL to be an anarchist, its punk, its rebelious. I have nothing against anarchists, as long as they know exactly what they are supporting, and actually agree with it, which is what mosts teen "anarchists" don't do.

[fightthepower]

I just took the political compass test again. I got:
Economic Left/Right -9.75
Authoritarian/ Libertarian -8.72

[Blackberry]

Quote: from Victorcommie on 4:54 am on Dec. 18, 2002
What Joykillah said, ,Anarchy is straight to classless, which wouldn't work unless (according to one anarchist I spoke to) there existed a very evolved mentality among the people, which is a crap-excuse. Anarchy is in favor of de-centralizing the government, which is another crap-theory that will never work, read Lenin for further reasons why.

Young Americans like to rebel, everyonce in a while you'll get one or two who wanna learn more, sometimes these mere children will develope a likeness for Anarchy without understanding other, more effective Socialist movements.


Your words ooze of ignorance.

READ AND LEARN (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/7017/what_is_as.html) before you speak.


(Edited by Neutral Nation at 10:39 am on Dec. 21, 2002)

[man in the red suit]

Quote: from Neutral Nation on 1:46 am on Dec. 21, 2002

Quote: from Victorcommie on 4:54 am on Dec. 18, 2002
What Joykillah said, ,Anarchy is straight to classless, which wouldn't work unless (according to one anarchist I spoke to) there existed a very evolved mentality among the people, which is a crap-excuse. Anarchy is in favor of de-centralizing the government, which is another crap-theory that will never work, read Lenin for further reasons why.

Young Americans like to rebel, everyonce in a while you'll get one or two who wanna learn more, sometimes these mere children will develope a likeness for Anarchy without understanding other, more effective Socialist movements.


Your words ooze of ignorance.

READ AND LEARN (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/7017/what_is_as.htm) before you speak.

hmm...I think your words ooze of more ignorance. we can't quite "learn" from a site that is no longer functioning. And what more is there to learn anyway?

trying to jump straight into a classless society is ridiculous. And as victorcommie mentioned, all of your "rational solutions" to enforce anarchy are crap excuses. If his words ooze with anything then they ooze with legitimate thought.

(Edited by man in the red suit at 7:42 am on Dec. 21, 2002)

[redstar2000]

I think NN might have chosen better words to criticize Victorcommie than "ooze with ignorance" -- on the other hand, it's hardly NN's fault if a site is temporarily down...seems to happen a lot.

Could we ever hope to see a literally OVERNIGHT transition from capitalism to a classless society? Obviously not, and I don't think you'd find any SERIOUS anarchist who would argue that.

The problem of "transition" is really TOUGH; it would be so EASY to allow what Marx & Engels thought of as a "temporary" proletarian state to INSTITUTIONALIZE itself...to become a permanent organ of repression and, ultimately, the basis for a new ruling class.

Lenin may or may not have "wanted" this to happen (people disagree about that), but it DID happen and anarchists don't want it to happen AGAIN. Neither do I!

Arguments of the style "anarchism can't work" are, I think, counterproductive...obviously, at some point, it HAS to work or the quest for a classless society is doomed.

One USEFUL way to address the question might take the form of: should the transition to a classless society take 1 year or 10 years or 100 years or 1,000 years?

Anarchists would push for the lowest number; a "generic" Leninist would be in the middle range; a hardcore stalinist/maoist would drift towards the upper range. My own personal view is that we ought to deliberately TRY for the lowest number without prematurely concluding that "it can't be done".

A communist revolution in any meaningful sense IMPLIES a working class far more conscious of its ultimate goals than is presently the case...and thus, far more capable of the kind of self-government (politically and economically) that a classless society REQUIRES. We shall not face the difficulties that Lenin, Stalin, and Mao faced--and we should not allow ourselves to be constrained by the limits of THEIR historical conditions.

If things go well, it MAY be that the anarchists are closer to what will actually happen than anyone now believes possible.

[RGacky3]

a classless society does not = anarchy. You can easily have government and a classless society. Anarchy in small scale can work, execially if the people can orgnise a communal government, where every person IS the government. But in large scale it would turn into chaos.

[man in the red suit]

Quote: from RGacky3 on 3:55 pm on Dec. 21, 2002
a classless society does not = anarchy. You can easily have government and a classless society.

there's only one problem Gacky, my misguided friend,

anarchists do not want government!

[BOZG]

There cannot be a classless society while a government exists. A government is always elitist because a person in government has more say and more power than somone who is not. And if you believe that you can have a person in government is who has an entirely equal say as an "average" person, then there is no need for a government.

[Som]

On the question of straight to a classless society, many anarchists generally believe that in a certain sense, while the communist would like to create this classless through the organs of the state, generally anarchists want to do it directly with the masses, having the working class organize itself as it so chooses. You could say this is straight to a classless society, but its just a society that progresses at its own will.
Some of the syndicalists would help this process along through radical trade unions.

Overnight? it'll occur at whatever rate those involved take action to make it that.

Historically, this sort of organization has happened a few times, where the workers took control of the factories and areas were collectivized. The 1974 revolt against the portugese government, 1968 french strike, The mahknovists in Ukraine in 1917, and the spanish revolution in the 30s in the areas near Barcelona.
all stopped by outside forces.

Its not necesarily 'overnight' but history is in favor of this sort of creation of a classless society.
Its hardly a ridiculous idea.

[fightthepower]

Redstar, I agree with you completely, but I would like to add one point; the time that it would take to create anarchy would be very different in varying areas. A lot would have to do with the mindset of the public. For example if a large portion of the people was brainwashed during the rule of a capitalist regime, then the transition may not go as smoothly and would take longer, where as, in a situation where close to everyone in an area wanted anarchy, then the transition would be very quick and easy.

[peoplenotprofits]

Quote: from peterson2k4 on 10:10 pm on Oct. 5, 2001
The way I see it Anarcy can never happen again unless EVERY 1st world country is destroyed.

It's already happening right as we speak, you don't need to overthrow some fictional entity such as "government" to get there.

[/quote]
If this dosen't happen some other country will take over the land that the anarcist have. Even if anarcy did exist it couldn't last very long. Someone would eventually rise up and creat some kind of government. So why do people beleave in it?[/quote]

I dont know.Why do you have some Grand delusion that there is such thing as "government"in the first place?



[/quote]
Is Anarcy a way for teenagers to rebel against their community, School and social standards? Is it so the angry youth of america has something to shock their families at the dinner table and say in a ignorent tone "Fuck all Athority!?"

If I am incorrect in any way please set me straight.
[/quote]

Without "laws" everyone would murder and steal with inpunity.




(Edited by peoplenotprofits at 11:00 pm on Dec. 31, 2002)

[mentalbunny]

I wouldn't call myself an anarchist but I am very liberal (see "I've moved" thread in chit-chat). I agree that pure anarchism is damn nigh impossible but I'm aiming for a very liberal, very democratic society, idealy I'd love to live in an anarcho-syndicalist commune (like in Monty Python and the holy grail!).

it is sad that so many people dont' know what they are talking about, I think the real revolution will be through education, let's go out and teach them!!!