internet has the only real functionnal anarchist society?

[danyboy27]

i never had much faith in anarchism, but i do think the whole way million of people interrace with each other inside the internet is somehow, a functionnal version of anarchism.

people can do almost whatever they want, there is no or alomost no rules in it, no control structure etc.

sound like working anarchy to me.

[RGacky3]

spetnaz, I'm sorry, I generally don't like to be rude, but you really are an idiot. Now then I know people have told you before to read about something or at least learn about it before forming opinions or making statements about it, but I"m beggin you, PLEASE, do that. Read about Anarchism, learn what it is, THEN make an opinion.

[Ele'ill]

Anarchism is nothing like the internet. The internet is controlled by a handful of very powerful people. Access to the internet and quality of access is determined by money. Content of the internet is controlled Terms of Agreement via ISP and through censorship depending on the country.

All of this mandates or controls who can view what content and who can participate or interact with the internet.

It is true that wireless opens up opportunities for a 'free internet' where anybody with a computer or PDA can access everything but there are many people that cannot afford a computer or PDA and on top of that there are many people that have been born into poverty that do not understand current technologies and cannot use them even if they were free.

[danyboy27]

spetnaz, I'm sorry, I generally don't like to be rude, but you really are an idiot. Now then I know people have told you before to read about something or at least learn about it before forming opinions or making statements about it, but I"m beggin you, PLEASE, do that. Read about Anarchism, learn what it is, THEN make an opinion.

a pm would have been fine, humiliate me like that wont do squat.

[RGacky3]

Your right I apologise, but seriously.

[revolution inaction]

i never had much faith in anarchism, but i do think the whole way million of people interrace with each other inside the internet is somehow, a functionnal version of anarchism.

people can do almost whatever they want, there is no or alomost no rules in it, no control structure etc.

sound like working anarchy to me.

The bit in bold is not anarchist, anarchism requires organisation.
also the internet does have rules and a control structure, but not an anarchist one.

[PostAnarchy]

Anarchism is nothing like the internet. The internet is controlled by a handful of very powerful people. Access to the internet and quality of access is determined by money. Content of the internet is controlled Terms of Agreement via ISP and through censorship depending on the country.

All of this mandates or controls who can view what content and who can participate or interact with the internet.

It is true that wireless opens up opportunities for a 'free internet' where anybody with a computer or PDA can access everything but there are many people that cannot afford a computer or PDA and on top of that there are many people that have been born into poverty that do not understand current technologies and cannot use them even if they were free.

This The internet as has been stated previously is an elitist institution the fact that so very few people in this world are able to use it. I do think there are some progressive and libertarian aspects to the internet: such as file sharing and what not. But no you cannot say that the internet as a whole is a representative of anarchism.

[trivas7]

The internet is controlled by a handful of very powerful people.

What makes you think this? What evidence backs this up?

[danyboy27]

people may say everything they want about the internet still, laws on the internet are almost non-existent.

if you got the skill or know some friend, you can do whatever you want on the internet, whether is capitalist like ebay, or leftist like refleft.

[Bud Struggle]

What makes you think this? What evidence backs this up?

http://wallstreetexaminer.com/blogs/winter/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/paynoattentiontothatman.jpg

[RGacky3]

people may say everything they want about the internet still, laws on the internet are almost non-existent.

if you got the skill or know some friend, you can do whatever you want on the internet, whether is capitalist like ebay, or leftist like refleft.


Its not Anarchist in the least part because most of the internet is bought up, by people with a lot of money, web sights like this one pays money to a corporation.

[danyboy27]

Its not Anarchist in the least part because most of the internet is bought up, by people with a lot of money, web sights like this one pays money to a corporation.

so we should close revleft beccause it support capitalism?

[RGacky3]

so we should close revleft beccause it support capitalism?

It sells ads :), its payed for, it gets them money.

[danyboy27]

It sells ads :), its payed for, it gets them money.

so capitalism is not thatr bad when it support the left?

[Ele'ill]

What makes you think this? What evidence backs this up?


http://www.slate.com/id/2131182/

Also, i'm sure you are aware of Rupert Murdoch.

This was what I had on the fly. If you want more sources search for them yourself.

[Mr. Conservative]

The internet is a great example of the free market. You have people voluntarily exchanging information and goods over it. That's the whole idea behind capitalism.

[Mr. Conservative]

Also, i'm sure you are aware of Rupert Murdoch.

This was what I had on the fly. If you want more sources search for them yourself.

That doesn't prove your statement that the internet is controlled by a few powerful people. All it does it state the fact that the US ICCAN which assigns domain names. Your statement implies that a few powerful individuals controls all of the content on the internet which is false.

(I had to take out the link because it won't let me post it without 25 posts)

[Jazzratt]

The internet is a great example of the free market. You have people voluntarily exchanging information and goods over it. That's the whole idea behind capitalism.

Indeed. They are voluntarily exchanging goods and information using machines built by workers, demanding workers move said goods all around the planet and using an infrastructure built and maintained by workers. But this is all invisible because the glamour of "free markets" is spread thickly all over it.

[ZeroNowhere]

The internet is a great example of the free market. You have people voluntarily exchanging information and goods over it. That's the whole idea behind capitalism.
The internet is mutualist? I've never heard that before.
What, what? You're saying that the internet is a free market, but also capitalist? That doesn't make any sense, the free market and capitalism are incompatible.
Also, no rulers does not mean no rules.

[revolution inaction]

The internet is a great example of the free market. You have people voluntarily exchanging information and goods over it. That's the whole idea behind capitalism.

with capitalism aren't you supposed to pay?

[Mr. Conservative]

The internet is mutualist? I've never heard that before.

You're affirming the consequent.

Let's use RevLeft as an example. This site was voluntarily created and the members voluntarily post here. Or we could use Amazon.com as an example. They store goods in a warehouse so when a customer voluntarily orders something over their site it can be shipped to them.

[ZeroNowhere]

The internet does not follow a specific economic system. K? K.
Mutualism (the free market) consists of far more than just trading stuff.

[Mr. Conservative]

Who said the free market was just specific to economics or 'just trading stuff'? I certainly didn't mean it that way if that's how you interpreted it. The free market entails all voluntary actions.

[Jazzratt]

What, what? You're saying that the internet is a free market, but also capitalist? That doesn't make any sense, the free market and capitalism are incompatible.

The concept of a free market is capitalist. The recent trend on this site for arguing otherwise is deeply disturbing.

[RGacky3]

so capitalism is not thatr bad when it support the left?

No, I did'nt say that, Capitalism does'nt support the left, it supports money, the point is the INTERNET IS NOT ANARCHIST.

[revolution inaction]

Who said the free market was just specific to economics or 'just trading stuff'? I certainly didn't mean it that way if that's how you interpreted it. The free market entails all voluntary actions.

You think the "free market" includes everything people do voluntarily? thats a pretty unique definition

[danyboy27]

No, I did'nt say that, Capitalism does'nt support the left, it supports money, the point is the INTERNET IS NOT ANARCHIST.

i agree on that.

[Mr. Conservative]

You think the "free market" includes everything people do voluntarily? thats a pretty unique definition

No, it's not. That's the whole driving force behind the free market - voluntary transactions between two or more parties.

[Enragé]

The internet has the potential to be anarchist/communist. One thing pointed to that is that you can share music without actually losing the music you have (i.e you can send friends mp3's and still have the original mp3), also you can circumvent copyright policies, information is available to all (.. who have internet), and anyone can start a website (though ofcourse, if you have money, you can make a better one). I think, in fact, that the internet is yet another sign that the forces of production are growing out of control in regards to relations of production. The internet would in fact function better under communism/anarchism.

[revolution inaction]

No, it's not. That's the whole driving force behind the free market - voluntary transactions between two or more parties.

"transactions" you mean trading one thing for another? Cause earlier you said "Who said the free market was just specific to economics or 'just trading stuff'?" so does a market require trading stuff or not? I don't remember trading any thing on the internet, but I have got thing for free.