Anarchy

[Adios]

Human Nature doesn't keep Anarchy from working any more than it requires that a Monarchy be oppressive.

Gimme your sammich.  And your woman.

Or better yet

*thud* <--- lead pipe in the skull from behind.

Nice sammich.  Hiya, doll.  You're coming with me.

Fuck yeah.

Hawk,
now converted!

[Cain]

An Anarchist political system is going to have to include a variety of philosophies.  Sort of the way the American system includes Democrats, Republicans, Conservatives, Progressives, etc.  But the vast majority of those are going to have to be Anarchist of some sort for Anarchy to work, just as in the American system a slim majority have to be in favor of a democratic republic.  Thus the desperate evangelism of Anarchists.  

I'm not sure you realize how little sense that makes.  There might be different approaches on how to go about living in a stateless society, but the instant someone slips and becomes less-than-pure, the whole thing goes to shit.

Which means a true anarchy would last about 0.000001ms.

Or to put it another way, under most political philosophies, it is not necessary that everyone believe in it.  Liberal democracy, for example "works" even if ~40% of the population do not believe in it as a viable system.

Anarchism on the other hand, is much more fragile and as a consequence falls apart very quickly.  The only way to enforce an Anarchist community would be to allow no-one with differing opinions to include themselves, violating a basic Anarchist principle and so betraying the entire ideological premise on which it is based.

[the last yatto]

'Anarchy will never work'

Indeed it requires everyone to agree to terms,
Which is why it often changes into a personality cult

[Cain]

An Anarchist political system is going to have to include a variety of philosophies.  Sort of the way the American system includes Democrats, Republicans, Conservatives, Progressives, etc.  But the vast majority of those are going to have to be Anarchist of some sort for Anarchy to work, just as in the American system a slim majority have to be in favor of a democratic republic.  Thus the desperate evangelism of Anarchists.  

I'm not sure you realize how little sense that makes.  There might be different approaches on how to go about living in a stateless society, but the instant someone slips and becomes less-than-pure, the whole thing goes to shit.

Which means a true anarchy would last about 0.000001ms.

Or to put it another way, under most political philosophies, it is not necessary that everyone believe in it.  Liberal democracy, for example "works" even if ~40% of the population do not believe in it as a viable system.

Anarchism on the other hand, is much more fragile and as a consequence falls apart very quickly.  The only way to enforce an Anarchist community would be to allow no-one with differing opinions to include themselves, violating a basic Anarchist principle and so betraying the entire ideological premise on which it is based.

Unless of course you can somehow convince 100% of people (or close enough) to become Anarchists, which seems a very unlikely proposal. 

[Adios]

I can haz be an anarchy of one?

[LMNO]

I can haz be an anarchy of one?

Give yourself a sammish.

[BabylonHoruv]

The part of Cain's post that I do not agree with is the idea that setting up an Anarchist society that excludes anyone who is not an Anarchist is a violation of Anarchist principles.

Freedom of association is really more of a freedom of nonassociation, as my choice not to associate with you sort of has to take precedence over your choice to associate with me.

Small societies based on Anarchist principles already exist, I grew up in one.  Yes, the members abided by the rules and conventions of outside society (for the most part) when they went out in it.


And in response to Charley's post, I think that's the rational Anarchist concept.  Personally I don't think a society of one is a concept that works.

[Doktor Howl]

Freedom of association is really more of a freedom of nonassociation,

That's like saying the first amendment provides freedom OF religion, but not freedom FROM religion.

Also, go right ahead and form your exclusive society, and good luck.  Just do it somewhere else.

[Adios]

The part of Cain's post that I do not agree with is the idea that setting up an Anarchist society that excludes anyone who is not an Anarchist is a violation of Anarchist principles.

Freedom of association is really more of a freedom of nonassociation, as my choice not to associate with you sort of has to take precedence over your choice to associate with me.

Small societies based on Anarchist principles already exist, I grew up in one.  Yes, the members abided by the rules and conventions of outside society (for the most part) when they went out in it.


And in response to Charley's post, I think that's the rational Anarchist concept.  Personally I don't think a society of one is a concept that works.

Oxymoron much?

[Doktor Howl]

Small societies based on Anarchist principles already exist, I grew up in one.  Yes, the members abided by the rules and conventions of outside society (for the most part) when they went out in it.

Hippie communes are one thing.

Now try it on a regional scale.

Guard your sammich.

[the last yatto]

So
Anarchy, like a commune, fails when it gets more then eight people and you have to put up with hairy females?


Army of one is guarding your grilled cheese

[Doktor Howl]

So
Anarchy, like a commune, fails when it gets more then eight people and you have to put up with hairy females?


Army of one is guarding your grilled cheese

Actually, the politics change AT 8 people, and again at multiples of 8.  Not sure why this is.

[Freeky]

So
Anarchy, like a commune, fails when it gets more then eight people and you have to put up with hairy females?


Army of one is guarding your grilled cheese

Actually, the politics change AT 8 people, and again at multiples of 8.  Not sure why this is.

Because we're all just a bunch of computer generated programs, and most humans run on 8-bit processing?

[Doktor Howl]

So
Anarchy, like a commune, fails when it gets more then eight people and you have to put up with hairy females?


Army of one is guarding your grilled cheese

Actually, the politics change AT 8 people, and again at multiples of 8.  Not sure why this is.

Because we're all just a bunch of computer generated programs, and most humans run on 8-bit processing?

[Adios]

So
Anarchy, like a commune, fails when it gets more then eight people and you have to put up with hairy females?


Army of one is guarding your grilled cheese

Actually, the politics change AT 8 people, and again at multiples of 8.  Not sure why this is.

Because we're all just a bunch of computer generated programs, and most humans run on 8-bit processing?

OMG. Freeky wins an internet.