Anarchy: Bullshit or will it actualy work out?

[Stuart Tusspot]

I've a friend who is into that whole anarchy scene and what not, point is. I want to hear the highs and lows of it and your thoughts.

[Taylor]

Bullshit. Tell your friend to stop being so angsty, and to invest his rebellious years in smoking and painting his nails black instead.

[Vile]

agreed.

If you want thrills, join a cult with him and commit mass suicide.

[MST3Kakalina]

i think anarchy is a good idea, except that people suck.

[Vile]

Only when it is needed. People are so stupid about it. They think they have it sooo baadd. Yeah, go the fuck down to south africa and DARE complain about how your government is screwing you over. If you want to change things, you don't blow it up.

arrarrarr.

[Meat Load]

I've heard of anarchist communities that actually work. In fact, I think there's one somewhere in my state.

The point being that it can work, but not for everyone.

[Invader Lando]

I don't think it'll prevail.
Although I'm VERY anti-government (because most of the members are liars, cheaters, and are morrally bankrupt), I don't believe in anarchy.

[exemplary citizen]

i think anarchy is a good idea, except that people suck.
Much like communism. It works wonderfully on paper and in small groups, but never ever on a large scale.

Because there will always be people to take advantage of the weaknesses of such a system, and those guys always fuck it up for everyone.


Anyways, are we talking the "YEAAH, FUCK THE PRINCIPAL, TENTH GRADE SUCKS!" version of anarchy, or the more well-thought out "voluntary cooperation of the citizenship in lieu of organized government" version?

[SLUM WIZZARD]

the more well-thought out "voluntary cooperation of the citizenship in lieu of organized government" version?
This one, hopefully. (I have some site on my favorites somewhere that explains in detail how it would all work, I have to go dig it up and post it here.)

[Stuart Tusspot]

This one, hopefully. (I have some site on my favorites somewhere that explains in detail how it would all work, I have to go dig it up and post it here.)
do that please, i wanna show him this shit. boy he's stupid.

[Invader Lando]

Anyways, are we talking the "YEAAH, FUCK THE PRINCIPAL, TENTH GRADE SUCKS!" version of anarchy, or the more well-thought out "voluntary cooperation of the citizenship in lieu of organized government" version?

No idea.
But the first one is pretty much what the punk posers say at my school.
It's really sad.

[cyberen]

Anarchy would be a good idea if we were all honest and nobody took advantage of another person. However, it's better to have a system where people who try to appease the masses rule (or at least look like they do), instead of whoever is strongest and meanest rules. But in the choice between an oppressive dictatorship and anarchy, I'd go for the latter.

[töm]

Much like communism. It works wonderfully on paper and in small groups, but never ever on a large scale.no~thing ever works on a large scale. unless if you want to talk about inefficient bureaucracies...

i think that anything that isn't very self-contained and one-minded will not work to a T. but, of course, there are quite a number of problems with such a self-contained one-minded community... from an external point of view. someone will get the wise idea to make a mess of things, and there will be nothing to stop them except for the collective will of a deputation (hence destroying the anarchal aspect), or common chaos (hence destroying... everything.)

so. anarchy? thumbsdown.

[robot]

it works in small communes, but as a whole, no.

[Liz]

I think most people who are into anarchy are full of horse shit.

I wish we had never developed technology or governments and that we were all peaceful tribes. I wouldn't mind dying at the age of 40 with lack of medical technology. We fit into our environment much better then, instead of trying to conquer it. Is that considered anarchy?
"We live like penguins in the desert. Why can't we live like tribes?"

[MST3Kakalina]

but aren't there penguins that live in some desert in africa somewhere?

the thing with technology is, it's either all or nothing. you either go all the way and develop reliable spacecrafts and miracle cures, or you have nothing. we're at a point where we can cause a lot of damage, but we can't really reverse it.

[Stuart Tusspot]

but aren't there penguins that live in some desert in africa somewhere?

the thing with technology is, it's either all or nothing. you either go all the way and develop reliable spacecrafts and miracle cures, or you have nothing. we're at a point where we can cause a lot of damage, but we can't really reverse it.
yea and south america.

[Shiv]

Tribes? Peaceful? You're shitting me. People have always been fucking each other over. Small tribes kill/pillage/rape other tribes and oppress their own people (usually the women) as much as technologically advanced, chaotic democracies do. It's just on a smaller scale 'cause there's less of them that's all.

[Liz]

Tribes? Peaceful? You're shitting me. People have always been fucking each other over. Small tribes kill/pillage/rape other tribes and oppress their own people (usually the women) as much as technologically advanced, chaotic democracies do. It's just on a smaller scale 'cause there's less of them that's all.

Bah, some tribes were awful, but some tried to play nice.

[Shiv]

Same with modern communities, where community still exists. My area is perfectly nice in that we mostly keep to ourselves and don't bother eath other. There's one asshole family that makes the place dangerous, but one of them messed with my brother and got into all sorts of trouble with mr. law, so that's not a problem any more. I know areas near me that feel like warzones, but I know more that are quite safe and normally tollerant of all kinda of diversity. Most people do tend to try and play nice.

[Liz]

yeah but I wish everyone could be like that. Except in tribe form since I think it's more possible to keep to yourself that way, and the simplistic living....

Damn, let's all just be amish or something.

[Shiv]

Um.... I like cities... You're perfectly welcome to go live in a sheltered hippie colony if you really want to. Just not my cup of tea. I like lots of people, because the more people you know, the more likely it is that a few of them will not be idiots. That's my main issue with small, sheltered communities. Irelands even a bit too small for me and there's a 4 million of us.

[Linzoy]

I don't think it's possible for a society to stay simple for very long. I was reading a book about native americans and they had a pretty normal society, with houses and roads. The only reason they seemed primitive is because by the time a lot of europeans started colonizing disease had already killed out most of the natives, so they had to live in little tents. That kind of lifestyle isn't natural for us and I think it's good that we push away from it, even if a lot of people talk about how simple everything should be.

[the Worms]

Much like communism. It works wonderfully on paper and in small groups, but never ever on a large scale.

What does that even mean? Sounds like a bad model of a physics problem: it works out beautifully on paper, but it turns out to be completely false. Marxist communism is a gigantic farce. It is too simplistic in that it assumes that the only significant variable in society is economy. Imagine! When in any situation has there ever been only one significant variable?

Anarchy is great as long as there are no people involved in it. The two are diametrically opposed.

[MST3Kakalina]

i think that saying it only works on paper or in small groups implies more variables than just one; it's just that all of the variables are dependent on people in a situation like that.

and i just woke up, so ignore me.

[the Worms]

I'm saying that saying it works on paper but not in practice is the same as saying it doesn't work at all. What has paper got to do with people?

I'm also saying, as a fact, that Marxist communism is based on economy and nothing else. That's a single variable. That's why it is a worthless pile of dung that looks too good to be true: it is too simplistic to be true.

[Evasive]

I've heard of anarchist communities that actually work. In fact, I think there's one somewhere in my state.

The point being that it can work, but not for everyone.

the fact that there are anarchist communities means that they are not anarchist at all...since a community is a form of a system. There's no such thing as true anarchy because everything is part of a system.

[Shiv]

I'm also saying, as a fact, that Marxist communism is based on economy and nothing else. That would explain why my friend studying economy in uni is so into marxism. Frustrates the hell outta me, it's hard to see things from someones point of view when it's so bloody narrow.

[the Worms]

That's why marxists are a dying breed.

[robot]

by nature, human cultures are always at least some what structured

[the Worms]

John Locke used to claim that man was naturally autonomous. But this claim was used to support the notion that government was an unnatural state which man had created; i.e. governments are not God-given. At the time, the prevailing theory was that the King was appointed and anointed by God; thus, there were 'natural rulers.' Any free man today will reject this notion unless it is based in raw ability. Funny thing is, though, for Locke, autonomy meant anarchy, and man hated anarchy so much that he gave up some of his freedom in order to be protected from his fellow man. In other words, man becomes predator to himself when unbound by human law.

[MajorB]

The problem with anarchy is that it relies too much in trusting that everyone will be good. However, as history shows, there are a lot of bastards in society. For every good person that doesn't abuse the system, there will be many who commit crimes and act stupid, and laugh when you realize there is no organized way to stop them. Thus, any system of anarchy implemented in a non-utopian world is doomed.

Consider this:

1. Government is overthrown and replaced with anarchy. For a while, this may float.
2. Crime starts happening. Rape, theft, murder starts happening.
3. Victims fight back, eventually the community forms a sort of militia.

At this point, a new government may arise from the collapsing system. If not:

4. Shit goes down as militias begin to fall apart and fight with others, and riots become commonplace.
5. Caos erupts.
6. Among the confusion, another country comes in and easily takes over.

Hey guys, I'm back. :-P

[Meat Load]

the fact that there are anarchist communities means that they are not anarchist at all...since a community is a form of a system. There's no such thing as true anarchy because everything is part of a system.
Well, it's not so much a "community" as it is a fenced-off area designated for them. But you know what I mean. Anarchists are probably going to know if they're doing something decidedly un-anarchistic.


P.S. Everyone: we get it guys, anarchy's not the best idea. Let the thread die already, or take the discussion in a new direction. I'm tired of seeing many different people post the same thing.

[poopzim]

I love how everyone assumes people will go crazy and do whatever they want without government control. There were many villages in many different time periods and locations that were peaceful and the people looked out for eachother, but the local law enforcement (samurai, knights, etc.) would abuse power and cause all those problems.

Then again, you have to keep in mind that the people in america and many other countries can't take of themselves. Most people don't know any better and would starve to death. The great depression showed how much people in america depended on the government and money. So anarchy would cause anarchy only because people just don't know any better. It's not like everyone knows how to look for water, build a shelter, and grow their own food.

[the Worms]

In that case, the question becomes one of whether it is natural for people to commit crimes against each other once stripped of the rubrick of government. The tendency, as we have agreed, is that people will hurt each other, but is that a natural tendency or is it ingrained in us by a governmental society. I haven't yet made a conclusion on this, but it is definitely a possibility that it is the government babying us that makes us think that we want to commit crimes. This is the fundamental assumption of anarchy.

[Shiv]

I have two theories on why people try to hurt each other. One, the simpler, is basic territorialism. When there are too many individuals trying to live off the same territory there is a natural compulsion to compete. This is true for everything in nature. Plants become agressive in competing for a place to grow, animals of the same species fight or kill for space/food/sex etc. Different species often fight and kill each other if they have similar food and territorial requirements (lions and hyenas for example). Humans are the same. We kill animals and plants that compete with us (otherwise known as weeds/pests) or threaten us in any way. We also compete and attack each other if we feel threatened. Violence becomes more of a problem in tightly packed groups of people like cities because people don't have room to breed and everyone's fighting for a little sunlight.

This leads to the other theory. Violent people are often less intelligent so they have less options in competing. They can't gain dominance by competing in an intellectual or monetary way, so they resort to undermining those aspects of power and use aggression. Society is, in my opinion, a way of undermining the social ladder for people who can't compete in an aggressive or physical way. It works both ways and to create a society you have to choose which social ladder is easiest for you to climb and then promote it. It's about survival.

This leads to another important point in human nature. It may be in our nature to compete but it is also in our inherint nature to cooperate. All social animals need this instinct and humans are no exception. Living in large groups like cities or countries or a global society requires vast amounts of tolerence. When someone becomes intollerable (threatening or taking advantage of others), society basically gangs up on them, and law or accepted social structures are a way of solidifying this behaviour and making it easier to apply to the masses.

On the other hand, democracy is a form of government that can be poked and prodded and slowly changed so that it doesn't become too stagnant due to this moral solidification.

[the Worms]

That still leaves the question of social influence vs. instinct unanswered. Why are we territorial? What is it that threatens us or that we feel threatened by? Man doesn't seem to have any natural predators except himself, but this does not seem natural based on other animals. Is man also an exception in this regard, and if so why? Just something to ponder.

[MST3Kakalina]

i think that people aren't necessarily territorial by nature. a lot of indian tribes practiced what would pretty much equate to communism (no private ownership of property, communal living) along with a lack of truly centralized and established government. if someone committed some kind of crime, he was pretty much shamed out of the village. they were territorial in that they fought with other tribes, but that's pretty much it. the idea of personally owning land had never occurred to them; granting indians PRIVATE ownership of the land was one way the US was able to move them out. after they'd give individual parcels of land to people, carpet-baggers and and such would pretty much swarm in and give the indians somewhat shady deals.

i think there's still tribes left in places like South America that still practice this idea of communism/pseudo anarchy successfully, as well.

and i know this is the part where Shiv says tribal life wasn't that good and everyone went around beating each other up and getting shitfaced and so on, but i dunno. i really don't think that's how it necessarily was.


so yeah. i don't think we're necessarily THAT territorial, and that it's more of a social influence than anything.

[Stuart Tusspot]

You people make me sick. Yeah you know who im talking about. People who dont stop to think about what you are doing to this world. And the people who know what they are doing and dont give a flying fuck, well you people make me the sickest i have ever felt. Okay this is for those of you people who are actually reading this. Look around you and whats going on? I dont mean whats going on around you in the room not just whats going on down the hall or outside. WAR DEATH POLTION AND A DESTROCTION OF A PLANET AND ALL THAT LIVES ON IT. Just for those people who want money who want power and dont give a fuck about you. But i do give a fuck about you people. Even the dumb fucking people who make me the sickest who dont care about this world and dont see what theyre actions are doing to this world. We as a PEOPLE need to do this, STAND UP and fight for our rights to live, to breathe clean fucking air!, to not waste our time in a cubicle, to see the sun, to lay in the grass and to stop greedy mother fuckers like bush and tony blair to "save us from our selves" STAND THE FUCK UP! Rise against our masters and tople their empires! And if you need some help I will be there, I will lead you, I will be killed at the end. I will be the one who get the bulletin in the back of the head, why? Because i care. Because i want this world to go on in a good way. Not the way its going. Becuase the way the world is now we are all going to die very soon. You will either melt or freeze from a nuke war. Or maybe youll be hit a bus. Or maybe youll be arrested for trying to stop whats going on. Maybe we will all be killed by a comet smashing into the earth. But i doubt it.

THIS IS OUT TIME, THIS IS OUR WORLD, THESE ARE OUR LIVES!!!!!

Live them the way you want to live. Stop going to work, steal what you need from the huge corporations. Love the people you know and love the people you dont. Love the people you hate. Just realize that one day you WILL DIE. WE ALL WILL DIE. So fucking live it up mother fuckers! Stop wasting your life in a fucking room with hardly and sun light and break out, stand in the sun shine and say this is my fucking life and you mother fuckers arent going to keep me down anymore! This is what i want to do! Just because you fuckers want to get rich and get fat and sit in your HUGE HOUSES AS WE SLAVE AWAY FOR YOU, SAY NO MORE!!! NO MORE! Will we sit idlely by NO MORE will we slave our lives away NO MORE will we let your religious beliefs opperess us! NO MORE will we stand for you actions! NO MORE will we let you polute OUR PLANET OUR WORLD OUR LUNG AND BODIES!!!!!!!!

STAND THE FUCK UP! TOGETHER THEY CANT DO ANYTHING TO US!!

THIS COUNTRY IS SUPPOSE TO BE UINTIED! ALL I SEE IS A BUNCH OF FAT FUCKERS IN THEIR NICE LITTLE OFFICES CONTROLLING THE ENTRIRE WORLD SAYING THAT THIS COUNTRY IS UNTIED.

If theres to be a war let it be against these people who opperess you and i! Lets stop these fuckers together! I stand for peace and new begining! Lets stop these people now before its to late!!! STAND TOGETHER STAND UNITED! WE THE PEOPLE UNITED CANNOT BE STOPPED!!!!



CHE VIVA!!!!!!!!

IF YOU ARE NOT WITH ME YOU ARE AGAINST ME ! That's the same guy who is into that whole anrachy bullshit.

[MST3Kakalina]

tell him to invest in a spellcheck.


christ, what an idiot.

[implode]

yikes.

but he makes a good point, whether it be completely unintentionally or not: it's entirely too easy to hate the government, which i hope to reveal in this piece i've entitled... <u>OMGTHE GOVERNMENT.</u>

"we as a society need to stand up and knock the kitten of complacency off our chests. for though he is cute, with his promises of a better world, and he'll nuzzle against your face and give you the tingle of per capita success, in the end, he's only serving his own interests and you are a fool for thinking otherwise. think of all the time you waste on this kitten! all the effort you put into keeping him fat (like, omgtaxes) and keeping him healthy (like, omgmilitary service) and what does he do for you, friends?! sits around and looks cute. while the rest of the pound looks on at him in disgust.

we need to discard the fallacy of safety, stop worrying about whether big brother will protect us in the "brave new world" of false WMD claims and legalised treason. you can only be lied to so many times before you cannot distinguish the truth anymore! and i see more and more of my friends falling into this catagory, and it makes me sick. my contemporaries! fooled by the illusion of community and safety! the government will not protect you when the end is upon us! the government cares little beyond their own corporate investments! if you can't see that, you might as well gouge out your own fucking eyes, because you're not using them to see in the first place.

WE NEED TO STAND UP! CAST AWAY THE ILLUSION OF SAFETY AND FIGHT FOR THE LITTLE GUY! gone is the world of our ancestors, where success was judged by how much work you were willing to put in! now it all depends on who's ass you're willing to kiss, and how long you'll hold each cheek in your mouth. well, I SAY NAY. i will not fight for your wealth! i will not fight for your ideals! I WILL FIGHT ONLY FOR WHAT IS RIGHT, AND WHAT IS RIGHT IS BRINGING DOWN YOUR HOUSE OF LIES AND EVERY STRUCTURE THAT BASES ITSELF UPON IT! we cannot sit by any longer, friends! this is what they WANT us to do! they want us to rot away in our homes, wasting our lives on whatever garbage american idol is churning out this season, instead of READING BOOKS AND LEARNING! LEARNING ABOUT THEIR LIES! the time for action has been upon us for years, and if it takes me to sieze the reigns of the revolutions and drive this dogsled of human aggression straight into the uncharted territories that it belongs, i am up for the challenge!! the question is: are YOU?

also, corporations globalisation war in iraq donald rumsfeld george w. bush nazis."

---

that is a golden pipeline of crap, and it took me 10 minutes to come up with it. and people would base their lives around it, because it's a rally cry. what the fuck. is that why the unionizing movement was so successful? why are people so inclined to rally behind a cause without even thinking about it? what is it about aggression and rejection that makes people so... so VITAL? why do we fight? what do we have to prove? that we're stupid, like grizzly bear? "we're stupid, but we have claws, and you'll regret ever fucking with US." should be a battle cry of the REVOLUTION. LONG LIVE CHE GUAVARA WHOEVER HE WAS.

[MST3Kakalina]

you gotta fight for your right to party.

[implode]

it just hit me one night when we were all fucked up and this dude started reading his "book" to the room - it sounded like legatos friend, there. sure, the government seems like a big shady monster, but writing about what you think the big shady monster might be doing serves no purpose if you don't actually know what it is. you're just pumping your fist in the air because you've been told that it looks cool.

licensed to ILLY OI!

[Stuart Tusspot]

it just hit me one night when we were all fucked up and this dude started reading his "book" to the room - it sounded like legatos friend, there. sure, the government seems like a big shady monster, but writing about what you think the big shady monster might be doing serves no purpose if you don't actually know what it is. you're just pumping your fist in the air because you've been told that it looks cool.

licensed to ILLY OI!
He cried like a bitch when a few of my friends told him he was wrong, also he hates not being blindly supported.

[Magenta]

Here's a vastly over-simplified description of anarchy in order to get my opinion across.

Anarchy = no gov't, right? Well, you are living in your happy, everyone-loves-everyone hippy world, and things are going good.

Timmy wants a candybar, so he steals Margie's Wonka Bar.

RESULT A)
Gov't is nonexistant, no one is allowed to punish Margie. Crimes continue to occur, until it escalates into unpunished murder. Therefore, everyone is killed.

RESULT B)
Gov't is nonexistant, so Margie takes matters into her own hands, and punches Timmy. She eats her wonka bar and is happy, but this type of "eye for an eye" idea of punishing others for their crimes against you continues until Mr. Timothy bumps into Mme. Margaret on the street and Mme. Margaret finds this as grounds to beat Mr. Timothy until he suffers a fatal concussion. Eventually, everyone is killed.

Thank you Timmy and Margie for explaining why anarchy is wrong.

The only way anarchy works is with VERY SMALL groups that all have the SAME belief system and agree on right and wrong.

[MST3Kakalina]

RESULT C)

Timmy is shamed out of the community by everyone else, as they have all been raised by their community to have a strict sense of honor.


or RESULT D)

communism galore! since no one really owns anything, the Wonka bar was never Margie's to begin with. =P


but seriously. "wrong" is a pretty strong term to use there. just because it's impractical doesn't make it bad.

[Shiv]

So what we're getting to here is that anarchy ultimately results in a form of gang based society? In other words, all animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others...

[the Worms]

I don't think it is as much a problem with equality, whether enforced or unenforced. Even assuming the virtuous nature of humanity sans the aegis of government, there is still the problem of standardizing what is and isn't an acceptable action. I.e. there is no way to respect everyone if the standards for respect are different. And in a society of free thought, standards will always be different. This means that a society can only be harmoniously anarchic if there are no new lines of thought and standards for ethical action are accepted by all; in other words, anarchy can only be harmonious under the eye of government, ironically enough. In which case, harmonious anarchy does not exist, and there is a good reason it is thought of with fear.

Nietzsche described five types of people in a short work whose name escapes me (something with the word "historical" in it). Four of these are happy lives to lead, though they are all based upon a false principle. One of these lifestyles is the life of the rebel. This is a person who constantly criticizes and thinks that the system can and should be better. This is a person who feels that justice is the highest principle and that all heretofore has not be adequately just. The falsehood of this assumption is that once injustice is wiped away, there is nothing to replace it with. Such is the plight of the anarchist as I see it. It is a fulfilling life until anarchy finally does reign supreme and the discovery soon arises that it is a non-thing.

[Magenta]

RESULT C)

Timmy is shamed out of the community by everyone else, as they have all been raised by their community to have a strict sense of honor.
Timmy becomes bitter since he has no sense of ethics and kills everyone.
or RESULT D)

communism galore! since no one really owns anything, the Wonka bar was never Margie's to begin with. =P
No motivation (=$) to produce higher quality stuff, or invent things, or discover things, or be interested in the arts and have free will (see china, where you simply point to people and say "YOU WILL BE FAMOUS PIANIST, 5 YEAR OLD. START TRAINING NOW."

Everyone (even timmy) is sad.

Margie wants a wonka bar.

[Meat Load]

Wait, how old is Timmy again?

[the Worms]

either way, magenta, and the result is a communism not an anarchy, so the argument is falling off-topic.

[MST3Kakalina]

yeah, i was being kinda facetious with that one.


One of these lifestyles is the life of the rebel. This is a person who constantly criticizes and thinks that the system can and should be better. This is a person who feels that justice is the highest principle and that all heretofore has not be adequately just.

are you bringing that up for shits and giggles, or implying that i'm that type of person? or is it a comment on anarchists in general?

[the Worms]

I'm equating that type with anarchists. Chill out, man, I like you, I'm not going to insinuate things about you. If I wanted to say something about you, don't worry, I'd be explicit.

The justice of the anarchist is, simply put, an appeal to some primeval code which is defiled by the existence of government. In other words, there must be a reason to revolt against the status quo. This reason must be the anarchist's sense of justice, which is the root of all anger.

[MST3Kakalina]

I'm equating that type with anarchists. Chill out, man, I like you, I'm not going to insinuate things about you. If I wanted to say something about you, don't worry, I'd be explicit.


haha. yeah. i just am paranoid/overanalytical. a lot.


and the other part of the post i agree with, so. um. cheese?

[brokensirunit]

anarchy is only good if you are 7 feet tall and weigh 320 pounds. or when you have ALOT of guns in your house. otherwise anarchy is stupid

[Magenta]

Okay, this is a place for semi-intelligent conversation. Please explain your opinions better than "ANARCHY IS STUPID".

Its an idea that I don't think would work, and I explained why. You are simply trying to make yourself look intelligent without defending your argument.

[Stuart Tusspot]

anarchy is only good if you are 7 feet tall and weigh 320 pounds. or when you have ALOT of guns in your house. otherwise anarchy is stupid
leave this discussion, you've no idea whats going on here do you?