• Anarchism
    250 replies, posted
[B][IMG]http://puu.sh/3tPWG.png[/IMG][/B] [B] What is anarchism?[/B] [quote] Anarchism is often defined as a political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful. [/quote] [URL]http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism[/URL] _____________________________________________ [B]Popular Schools of Thought[/B] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-communism"]Anarcho-Communism[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism"]Anarcho-Syndicalism[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism"]Anarcho-Capitalism[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_anarchism"]Green Anarchism[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-pacifism"]Anarcho-Pacifism[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-queer"]Queer Anarchism[/URL] [B]...and many more exist![/B] _____________________________________________ [B]Anarchism means no rules, right?[/B] Wrong. Most anarchists simply rejects the notion that the [U]state[/U] is necessary for a functioning society. Social order and community rules and regulations are still seen as important. [B]What exactly IS the state?[/B] yawmwen's defintion of the state is pretty spot on. [QUOTE=yawmwen;40577519]"The State" should be the first thing identified in any discussion involving anarchist or libertarian ideas. To put it simply, "The State" is any entity that exists outside of the individual and community that seeks to impose authority on the individual and community. [/QUOTE] [B]How would rules be enforced without the use of police?[/B] There are many types of alternatives theorized by many difference people. Here's a short book on alternatives to police: [URL]http://rosecitycopwatch.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/alternatives-to-police-draft.pdf[/URL] ______________________________________________ So Facepunch, are there any other anarchists out there? If you are one, what schools of thought do you tend to side with? I will add on more to the OP later. Too tired to continue. [B]UPDATE: [/B][B]Books! [/B][QUOTE=RAYHALO;41301709][B]Bakunin[/B] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/godstate/index.htm#intro"]God and the State[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/mf-state/index.htm"]Marxism, Freedom and the State[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/bakunin-on-anarchism.htm"]Selected Works[/URL] [B] Pierre-Joseph Proudhon[/B] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/property/index.htm"]What is Property?[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/philosophy/index.htm"]System of Economical Contradictions[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/1849/government.htm"]The Nature and Destination of Government[/URL] [B]Emma Goldman[/B] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1906/tragedy-women.htm"]The Tragedy of Woman’s Emancipation[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1910s/anarchism.htm"]Anarchism: What It Really Stands For[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1911/woman-suffrage.htm"]Woman Suffrage[/URL] [B]Communism and Anarchism[/B] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/bio/robertson-ann.htm"]The Philosophical Roots of the Marx-Bakunin Conflict[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch04.htm#s2"]Controversy with the Anarchists[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/nov/24.htm"]Socialism and Anarchism[/URL] [B]Anarcho-Syndicalism[/B] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works/1905/revunion.htm"]Revolutionary Unionism[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/archive/deleon/works/1909/3.htm"]Syndicalism[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/rocker-rudolf/misc/anarchism-anarcho-syndicalism.htm"]Rudolf Rocker[/URL] [B]Anarcho-Syndicalism: Industrial Workers of the World[/B] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/unions/iww/1905/convention/index.htm"]The 1905 Proceedings of the Founding Convention of the IWW[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/unions/iww/1906/convention/iww.pdf"]Proceedings of the Second annual Convention of the IWW[/URL] [URL="http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/unions/iww/1907/iww_conv_1907.pdf"]Proceedings of the Third annual Convention of the IWW[/URL] [HR][/HR] [/quote] [B]Peter Kropotkin[/B] [URL="http://archive.org/details/cu31924032409710"]Fields, Factories, and Workshops[/url] [URL="http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23428"]The Conquest of Bread[/url]
I'm a Queer-Anarchist.
I personally don't support anarchism because I believe heavily in human corruption. If there wasn't corruption though I personally think a form of anarchism would be a great society. Of course though, human corruption is seen in all form of governments and causes the fall of them all. We honestly haven't got a chance to see anarchism on a large enough scale to judge it properly.
someone's edgy.
[QUOTE=DrumStick;41289998]someone's edgy.[/QUOTE] OP's being respectful, and while I don't personally agree, you should be respectful too.
i'm incredibly flattered that you quoted me and used the rose city copwatch link i posted in that mass debate thread. peace, justice, and anarchy to you all.
[QUOTE=matt000024;41289823]I personally don't support anarchism because I believe heavily in human corruption. If there wasn't corruption though I personally think a form of anarchism would be a great society. Of course though, human corruption is seen in all form of governments and causes the fall of them all. We honestly haven't got a chance to see anarchism on a large enough scale to judge it properly.[/QUOTE] i think human corruption is a large reason to NOT want the existence of 'the state'. but i personally don't believe human corruption is an inherent thing, i think greed and other anti-social human behaviours are learnt and taught, and when someone IS kind of just a dick, it's due to society that the behaviour is condoned or even praised (i guess i'm a fairly anti-capitalist anarchist?)
btw i think it should be noted that almost no one in any anarchist school of thought believes "anarcho"-capitalists are actually anarchists. anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron and the destruction of private property has been integral to every anarchist movement since proudhon himself.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41290071]i'm incredibly flattered that you quoted me and used the rose city copwatch link i posted in that mass debate thread. peace, justice, and anarchy to you all.[/QUOTE] no gods kings or countries! thats my anarchist motto
[QUOTE=matt000024;41289823]I personally don't support anarchism because I believe heavily in human corruption. If there wasn't corruption though I personally think a form of anarchism would be a great society. Of course though, human corruption is seen in all form of governments and causes the fall of them all. We honestly haven't got a chance to see anarchism on a large enough scale to judge it properly.[/QUOTE] human corruption is the reason the state can never actually adequately provide for or protect the people. if a person is corrupt with no power over others, who the fuck cares? when a person is corrupt and leads an institution that asserts authority over the lives of millions, then it becomes a serious problem.
[quote]Queer Anarchism[/quote] what
I'm probably like the only anarcho-capitalist here, but that's okay I guess.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;41290142]what[/QUOTE] rather than just reading the name and going 'what' maybe you should go to the link and read what it is! personally i don't think it's such a thing that should be kept separate from other forms of anarchy
"No Gods, No Masters" (A)
also here's some thread music [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kkecxUrejg[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t9GWuey5SQ[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d45MRkQTYbY[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cuo0Hg0TGH4[/media]
Bitch, please. This is the thread music. [video=youtube;hwuiHI0-z3c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwuiHI0-z3c[/video] [video=youtube;ST5P5aUlf78]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST5P5aUlf78[/video] [video=youtube;tFUvkOW-BEk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFUvkOW-BEk[/video]
The state isn't necessarily evil. It just works incredibly poorly and gets corrupted when it becomes too large. A decentralized system is better so that the state can better represent its citizens and address their needs. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Anfem.svg[/IMG] So Queer-Anarchism is basically Anarcho-Communism with LGBTQSPS rights mixed in?
all those songs i posted were folk-punk except a las barricadas ;)
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41290419]The state isn't necessarily evil. It just works incredibly poorly and gets corrupted when it becomes too large. A decentralized system is better so that the state can better represent its citizens and address their needs. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Anfem.svg[/IMG] So Queer-Anarchism is basically Anarcho-Communism with LGBTQSPS rights mixed in?[/QUOTE] Pretty much [IMG]http://platypus1917.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/these-faggots-kill-fascists.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41290419]The state isn't necessarily evil. It just works incredibly poorly and gets corrupted when it becomes too large. A decentralized system is better so that the state can better represent its citizens and address their needs. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Anfem.svg[/IMG] So Queer-Anarchism is basically Anarcho-Communism with LGBTQSPS rights mixed in?[/QUOTE] i think coercion through force is evil and frankly thats all i believe the state to be. 'do what we say or else' not do whats right not do whats best just do what we say.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41290419]The state isn't necessarily evil. It just works incredibly poorly and gets corrupted when it becomes too large. A decentralized system is better so that the state can better represent its citizens and address their needs. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Anfem.svg[/IMG] So Queer-Anarchism is basically Anarcho-Communism with LGBTQSPS rights mixed in?[/QUOTE] queer-anarchism seems redundant, isn't anarchism about, like, all rights?
the lgbt struggle has been largely ignored by anarchism for a very long time. queer anarchism intends to integrate their struggle into the greater class struggle. [editline]3rd July 2013[/editline] different groups struggle against oppression in different ways. the way a black man faces oppression is different from the way a lesbian might face oppression, which is different from the way a homeless person might face oppression.
but wouldn't it all still fall under the same flag?
Regardless of my feelings about the ideology (I don't know enough about it either way), online anarchist communities are usually some of the chillest out there so keep up the good work
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41290093]btw i think it should be noted that almost no one in any anarchist school of thought believes "anarcho"-capitalists are actually anarchists. anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron and the destruction of private property has been integral to every anarchist movement since proudhon himself.[/QUOTE] my views fall in similar line with those of anarcho-capitalists, but I don't identify as one myself. Keep in mind as I say this that I myself do not identify as anarchist so my opinions may be out of line with traditional anarchist thought. destruction of private property has literally nothing to do with anarchism, it's deconstruction of leadership that should be the primary focus. In my eyes, the whole point of anarchism is greater personal freedoms by way of less or no government interference. The only way to enforce a destruction of private property is by way of creating a larger USSR-style government, thereby completely defeating anarchism. if you're for the destruction of private property you should probably get rid of your house.
[QUOTE=butre;41291635]my views fall in similar line with those of anarcho-capitalists, but I don't identify as one myself. Keep in mind as I say this that I myself do not identify as anarchist so my opinions may be out of line with traditional anarchist thought. destruction of private property has literally nothing to do with anarchism, it's deconstruction of leadership that should be the primary focus. In my eyes, the whole point of anarchism is greater personal freedoms by way of less or no government interference. The only way to enforce a destruction of private property is by way of creating a larger USSR-style government, thereby completely defeating anarchism. if you're for the destruction of private property you should probably get rid of your house.[/QUOTE] the view of private property falls in line with the definition of "the state" that soccerskyman quoted me on [quote]"The State" should be the first thing identified in any discussion involving anarchist or libertarian ideas. To put it simply, "The State" is any entity that exists outside of the individual and community that seeks to impose authority on the individual and community.[/quote] private property is a form of authority that asserts itself with no merit other than the government/institutions recognizing it. if a landowner is not recognized by "the state", then it does not exist. therefore, it cannot exist in an anarchist society. and having a house isn't necessarily the same as having private property. when we talk about private property we are mostly concerned with the means of production: farms, factories, etc. a person should not be entitled to the resources or goods created on a piece of land simply because they own a deed to that land. the people who work should own the fruits of their labor and decide collectively how distribution is handled. [editline]3rd July 2013[/editline] having something that you actually utilize personally is a great deal different from having something that you simply leech off of.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41291684]a person should not be entitled to the resources or goods created on a piece of land simply because they own a deed to that land. the people who work should own the fruits of their labor and decide collectively how distribution is handled.[/QUOTE] that falls apart really quickly when you realize that the guy with the deed is doing the work. Even in situations where he's not the one actively out in the field picking the crops he'll be the one writing the paychecks of the guys who do. If the guys picking the crops are doing the work for free then they might have some say in distribution but other than that there are literally no variables here. The only situation where total destruction of private property might be possible is if the organization that recognizes property rights (ie. the state) is totally 100% dissolved but that's a pipe dream at best and quite possibly dangerous as recognizing property rights has never been the only duty of the state.
um dude look at what thread you're in. i do believe in the state being 100% dissolved. and yea signing those paychecks must be hard work, hard enough work to warrant whatever profits the owner wants, right?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41291852]um dude look at what thread you're in. i do believe in the state being 100% dissolved. and yea signing those paychecks must be hard work, hard enough work to warrant whatever profits the owner wants, right?[/QUOTE] many anarchists agree that the state is a necessary evil and that total dissolution is impossible. If running a business was easy, everybody would do it. Balancing profit margins is a harder task than you might think.
I'm just here for the violence :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.