News:

Mr Rogers is above all that nonsense.

Main Menu

ANARCHISM: The Thread!

Started by Rococo Modem Basilisk, September 17, 2009, 12:30:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cain

You honestly see no difference in how a government acts and how an individual acts?  Group psychology doesn't exist for you? 

Oh, so there is only one culture within a state boundary now?

Rococo Modem Basilisk

No. I am saying that the individual variation works better for determining individual actions than the collective variation does, not vice versa. Furthermore, I am arguing that state boundaries are more or less meaningless in many cases since without a major dissonance between culture and law combined with pretty extreme punishments for things required or expected culturally, culture supercedes law. Even in some cases where draconian punishments counter culturally expected practices the culture still supercedes the law in practice (ex. marijuana smoking).


I am not "full of hate" as if I were some passive container. I am a generator of hate, and my rage is a renewable resource, like sunshine.

Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

Yes, these are good comments, thanks Cain and Foamy!

Rational Anarchism is a personal philosophy about how much (or little) control a government actually has in practice, over the individual. So if you live in Nazi occupied Germany and you see your neighbors getting hauled out of their homes due to being Jewish, JW or Gay... you have to decide if the Government is in charge of you (and you bow your head and close the curtains), or if the government cannot impose their immoral actions and decisions on you, and that you personally are responsible as a rational human being to act. Obviously, there are many ways you could act, some stupid (running out and hitting the Gestapo guy with a club), or smart  (joining a group that's trying to stop/overthrow the existing government) or tricky (see Oskar Schindler). Rational Anarchy is the personal philosophy of TFY,S! in the realm of governance. That being said, the "rational" bit has a lot to do with the fact that its irrational to assume that all humans can function fine without any government at all. Government, for now, appears necessary, at least, because many humans appear to need it.

Is that less confusing then?


- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

Halfbaked1

I have identified myself as an Anarchist of late.  I had trepidations about doing so because peopel around here are very politically conscious and religiously conscious as well.  I use the term conscious loosely, but they pay attention to these things here.  But I must say that my coming to the conclusion that I am an Anarchist was born of revelations in how I viewed the existing governments of the world, those revelations being that I do not feel that the government of any nation has the right, morally or otherwise, to tell me how to live.  I am guided by the rational ideas that killing someone for insufficient reasons is simply wasteful of materiel, that stealing is a weak persons way of attaining things that they could do with a suitable application of work.  Various other moral concepts I have are based on my own thoughts on why things are unwise to do.  Does this mean that I am an Anarchist?  I have not read many of the sociological treatises and essays that you folks have so I am hoping you may illuminate me in this matter.

Jenne

:lulz: Ok, those of you wanting "no government" need to go LIVE in a place that has little to none and see what you think.  About the no running water, about the no electricty, no shots if you need them, no food when you need it, shit running down the fucking streets when there's no sewer, fuckers raping your mom and your sister because you're not home to protect them, cops raping you of your meager wages you worked 18 hours to get because no one says different, the government taking your car, you walk in rutted roads with shit running down them and no taxis affordable or buses available to get from point a to fucking b...

yeah.  Try.  Go and try.

Jenne

and I won't even get into who is selling whose child to what pimp and whatever.

fomenter

Quote from: Halfbaked1 on September 19, 2009, 04:05:59 AM
I have identified myself as an Anarchist of late.  I had trepidations about doing so because peopel around here are very politically conscious and religiously conscious as well.  I use the term conscious loosely, but they pay attention to these things here.  But I must say that my coming to the conclusion that I am an Anarchist was born of revelations in how I viewed the existing governments of the world, those revelations being that I do not feel that the government of any nation has the right, morally or otherwise, to tell me how to live.  I am guided by the rational ideas that killing someone for insufficient reasons is simply wasteful of materiel, that stealing is a weak persons way of attaining things that they could do with a suitable application of work.  Various other moral concepts I have are based on my own thoughts on why things are unwise to do.  Does this mean that I am an Anarchist?  I have not read many of the sociological treatises and essays that you folks have so I am hoping you may illuminate me in this matter.
its pretty simple to figure out, if you believe there should be no government you are a anarchist (and an idiot see jenne' s post)

if you believe every human is ultimately responsible for their own actions and the choices they make, the laws they obey and the laws they ignore or break and so on, you have the personal philosophy we are referring to as rational anarchist (see ratta's definition or the link i posted on the first page)
"So she says to me, do you wanna be a BAD boy? And I say YEAH baby YEAH! Surf's up space ponies! I'm makin' gravy... Without the lumps. HAAA-ha-ha-ha!"


hmroogp

Halfbaked1

HA!  We have people breaking into houses all the time now doing all the stuff that you mention Jenne.  And most of the time they either get away or get slaps on the wrist, depending on whether the ACLU decides to step in on the behalf of some lame ass git that they think has lived an underpriveleged life.  Roads?  Have you seen some of the roads these days?  They are disintegrating, as are the bridges and the power grids.  If this is the result of a governments kindly intervention then complete Anarchy might be a step up as then everyone will at least be slitting each others throats honestly.  While the government whines about people being uncivil at Town Hall meetings and and who should be covered by a public option insurance, where is the money to repair and maintain the infrastructure of America, a so-called Super Power?  We are only a few major storms or earthquakes away from being a third world style nation, if not in whole then in regions.  Of course I can only speak for the United States as far as this goes.

Fomenter, I appreciate what you said, I suppose I am one of the Rational Anarchists as I do actually have a vision of a form of decentralized governmental system.  I would not think that the masses could find their own assholes without some form of government to create a PSA about it.

Rococo Modem Basilisk

Quote from: Jenne on September 19, 2009, 04:23:13 AM
:lulz: Ok, those of you wanting "no government" need to go LIVE in a place that has little to none and see what you think.  About the no running water, about the no electricty, no shots if you need them, no food when you need it, shit running down the fucking streets when there's no sewer, fuckers raping your mom and your sister because you're not home to protect them, cops raping you of your meager wages you worked 18 hours to get because no one says different, the government taking your car, you walk in rutted roads with shit running down them and no taxis affordable or buses available to get from point a to fucking b...

yeah.  Try.  Go and try.

I don't need to remove government. Government is irrelevant enough to be arguably nonexistent already ;-)

Someone who is going to fuck people over is going to fuck people over regardless of whether or not it's against the law. The difference is that if it's against the law, they will probably do it in private so they don't get arrested.

That said, nobody here (aside from the people arguing AGAINST anarchy) in this thread are associating anarchy with the lack of government.


I am not "full of hate" as if I were some passive container. I am a generator of hate, and my rage is a renewable resource, like sunshine.

Bruno

Really real anarchists don't recognize the authority of dictionaries (or the bourgeois companies who print them) to tell them the meanings of words.
            /
Formerly something else...

Precious Moments Zalgo

Quote from: Enki v. 2.0 on September 19, 2009, 02:07:28 PMI don't need to remove government. Government is irrelevant enough to be arguably nonexistent already ;-)
:?
In what way are entities that spends billions or trillions of dollars every year, wage war against other countries, provide services to citizens, and enforce laws, irrelevant enough to be "arguably nonexistent"?

Quote from: Enki v. 2.0 on September 19, 2009, 02:07:28 PMSomeone who is going to fuck people over is going to fuck people over regardless of whether or not it's against the law. The difference is that if it's against the law, they will probably do it in private so they don't get arrested.
Right, and it would be so much better if they could openly fuck people over without fear of arrest.

Quote from: Enki v. 2.0 on September 19, 2009, 02:07:28 PMThat said, nobody here (aside from the people arguing AGAINST anarchy) in this thread are associating anarchy with the lack of government.
That's what I don't get.  Why would anyone associate the term "anarchy" with "the lack of government"?
I will answer ANY prayer for $39.95.*

*Unfortunately, I cannot give refunds in the event that the answer is no.

fomenter

Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on September 19, 2009, 02:10:51 PM
Really real anarchists don't recognize the authority of dictionaries (or the bourgeois companies who print them) to tell them the meanings of words.
            /

:lulz:
"So she says to me, do you wanna be a BAD boy? And I say YEAH baby YEAH! Surf's up space ponies! I'm makin' gravy... Without the lumps. HAAA-ha-ha-ha!"


hmroogp

Kai

On the other hand, I've met people who claim any "word" that's not in the OED isn't really a word.

Both are annoying as fuck.
If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water. --Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey

Her Royal Majesty's Chief of Insect Genitalia Dissection
Grand Visser of the Six Legged Class
Chanticleer of the Holometabola Clade Church, Diptera Parish

Rococo Modem Basilisk

Quote from: Pastor-Mullah Zappathruster on September 19, 2009, 04:04:51 PM
In what way are entities that spends billions or trillions of dollars every year, wage war against other countries, provide services to citizens, and enforce laws, irrelevant enough to be "arguably nonexistent"?

None of those statements are meaningful unless you assume the existence of government. They resolve into: "In what way are groups of people who trade lots of pieces of green paper, kill other people, give green paper to other people, and kill and/or lock up other people irrelevant enough to be nonexistent?"

After all, we're talking fiat currency here. Without government enforcement, the currency has no value. Likewise, law and country borders, as well as the concept of citizenship, are all meaningless outside the context of assumed governance. A government is a group of people who decides to call itself a government; whether or not you consider a given group a government is approximately as relevant as whether or not it considers itself a government, because in the end there is no hard and fast rule distinguishing a government from any other organization that trades currency and kills or imprisons people it doesn't like. Generally, the acceptance of sovergnity is based on whether or not it's accepted by other governments, which of course relies upon you believing that THEY are governments first.

I don't deny that governmental organizations have importance to everyday life. I deny that they are distinguishable from any other group of people who have equal importance to everyday life.


I am not "full of hate" as if I were some passive container. I am a generator of hate, and my rage is a renewable resource, like sunshine.

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: Halfbaked1 on September 19, 2009, 04:05:59 AM
I have identified myself as an Anarchist of late. 

Well, this thread is good for one thing.  Flushes out the Starbucks crowd.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.