A Discordian argument against Anarchism

[Doktor Howl]

mebbe i'm just dense...
the metric for determining if a system 'works' is whether it can be moved from a 'working model' to being achieved...

so, what's a 'working model'?

In this case, a functional society based on anarchic principles, on a scale useful for modern society.

[Faust]

mebbe i'm just dense...
the metric for determining if a system 'works' is whether it can be moved from a 'working model' to being achieved...

so, what's a 'working model'?

In this case, a functional society based on anarchic principles, on a scale useful for modern society.

And with the scale of modern society approaching that of an incredibly organised micromanaged termite mound, a practical implementation is unfeasible. Now the argument of anarchic cells when integrated into this view reveals something horrible.
Anarchic principles applied to pocket has the perquisite that the group be self sustainable... That the fuckers have money, its not like the rest of the world is going to give them stuff for free.
Anarchism goes from an interesting ideal, into a rare commodity only available to the rich. A status item.
In short anarchism is the Apple product of social structures. ianarchy anyone?

[Doktor Howl]

mebbe i'm just dense...
the metric for determining if a system 'works' is whether it can be moved from a 'working model' to being achieved...

so, what's a 'working model'?

In this case, a functional society based on anarchic principles, on a scale useful for modern society.

And with the scale of modern society approaching that of an incredibly organised micromanaged termite mound, a practical implementation is unfeasible. Now the argument of anarchic cells when integrated into this view reveals something horrible.
Anarchic principles applied to pocket has the perquisite that the group be self sustainable... That the fuckers have money, its not like the rest of the world is going to give them stuff for free.
Anarchism goes from an interesting ideal, into a rare commodity only available to the rich. A status item.
In short anarchism is the Apple product of social structures. ianarchy anyone?

DING.

Though there is an element of anarchy in this Temporary Autonomous Zone thing I'm bouncing around, it's no substitute for a society, but rather a means to exist in almost any society as a free human being.

[LMNO]

1) iNarchy.  I love it.

2) Dok, a suggestion: Instead of TAZ, a term which has been used and abused in the past, why not make the term more Science-y?  Maybe "Operating Room" or  "Secret Underground Lair"?

3) Hurov:  The "a person is rational, people are dumb" is an old trope, popularized by Men in Black, but existant much further back.  It's a comment on social dynamics.  And a Monarchy is not a single person acting alone, when looked at in pragmatic and historical terms.  A king has his pack of cabinet ministers and advisors and generals, just like any other tribal hierarchy. 

[President Television]

What I'm getting from all this is that it's a generally bad idea to support a political system that is centred around a single ideal, because everything else will suffer and the ideal itself will end up being a major victim of the proposed model. Eg. Communism/Equality, Anarchy/Freedom, Totalitarianism/Safety, Capitalism/Opportunity, Democracy/Satisfaction.

Thus, perhaps it is best not to pursue a particular ideal for the world so much as it's best to focus on our own activities and how we affect things locally. Perhaps it's best not to shackle ourselves to an ideology.
Of course, this should be a matter of course for Discordians.

[BadBeast]

The definition of Anarchy has always been up for interpretation, the most commonly held tenet, being the dissemination of organised Government.
So maybe we should split it into genres. We already have Anarcho-syndicalism, Rational Anarchy, Notional Anarchy, (and of course, Floating Anarchy)
So how about Me-narchy, (rule of me) You-narchy, (rule of you, ((Neither of which, need to be mutually exclusive.)) It's at this point, I wish my
Greek or Latin was better. Political systems always sound more credible in Latin or Ancient Greek. (Why is that?)

The redefinition of Western Democracy, is also long overdue, Maybe it could be renamed "Polyscatarchy". Or "Polycuniarchy".     

[East Coast Hustle]

I have yet to hear anyone explain how any anarchist political model could work in the real world on a practical scale.

unless everyone were to, say, get to vote on policies and/or representatives that would be entrusted with drafting and enacting and interpreting and enforcing those policies.

I guess that would be the lesser of all evils. Now we just need to think of a catchy name for it...

ECH,
Republarchist.

[Cramulus]

bump: because I found this x-posted somewhere and it got a ton of comments:

http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/11621

[Faust]

bump: because I found this x-posted somewhere and it got a ton of comments:

http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/11621

Lol @ the cain is a catholic or greek orthodox comment. Very few comments tried to engage the piece and just attacked the author.

[Precious Moments Zalgo]

I'm lol @ a few of them who admitted that they stopped reading as soon as they came across something that didn't fit into their worldview, and also at the "wingnut" tag on the article.

[Cain]

Wheee!

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

bump: because I found this x-posted somewhere and it got a ton of comments:

http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/11621

A few of those posters even read through the parts that conflicted with their worldview!

[Cain]

 

They're gonna prove how I'm wrong about them being dogmatic fanatics through ad hominem attacks on me!

To be fair, this was pretty much the intended result of the essay.  There are several flaws within it, leaps of logic if you will which I could fill in, or amend....but basically, if it makes them froth at the mouth and act all crazy I'm inclined to keep it as is.  For posterity.

[Requia ☣]

mebbe i'm just dense...
the metric for determining if a system 'works' is whether it can be moved from a 'working model' to being achieved...

so, what's a 'working model'?

I would add to this that it must be possible to approach the system incrementally.  You can argue that a fully implemented system would work, but regardless of whether or not this is true, a partially implemented system may still be a fucking disaster (see: deregulating the banks but preserving the Moral Hazard, for partially implemented libertarianism).

[Placid Dingo]

There's a shout out to Rat there too!

This argument was from the latest issue of Intermittens, and opposite was a good argument against his points. I can't seem to find it right now, but if anyone wants to read a good rebuttal to Cain, it's out there.