[QUOTE=yhan969;15473625]true anarchy would give people total freedom.[/QUOTE]
To rape murder pillage and burn.
[editline]11:42PM[/editline]
There is no art in anarchy, by the by. Free expression does not exist in an audience that will more than likely kill, skin and eat you.
Theres no point of it, its what happens when there is not government present.
for people who are fed up with taxes
Anarchy would be great if people were smart enough to realize that everyone killing each other for a limited amount of resources and no one produces will leave someone as king of the shit heap. Unfortunately, we're not, so anarchy as it exists sucks.
Fun fact: Alan Moore, the creator of Watchmen, is an anarchist.
It is for stupid kids to think they are tough... In reality, they just hate when they do something wrong and then they get in trouble for it...
[QUOTE=Squad;15476630]It is for stupid kids to think they are tough... In reality, they just hate when they do something wrong and then they get in trouble for it...[/QUOTE]
No. Try again.
[QUOTE=Lankist;15470525]They are, by each other.
Nobody else is there because Africa is a shithole and they have nothing they want.[/QUOTE]
Except diamonds... Lots and lots of diamonds... Which are money... Which means... oh forget it you are an idiot.
[editline]03:13AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;15476637]No. Try again.[/QUOTE]
No thanks, I will stick to my original point.
[QUOTE=Squad;15476662]No thanks, I will stick to my original point.[/QUOTE]
Except that as a former anarchist I can tell you you're wrong, and so I will.
You are wrong.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;15476721]Except that as a former anarchist I can tell you you're wrong, and so I will.
You are wrong.[/QUOTE]
Former?
[QUOTE=thisispain;15476730]Former?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I've sort of given it up as a reasonable ideal.
Well, a reasonable political structure, anyway. I still like it as an ideal.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;15476737]Yeah, I've sort of given it up as a reasonable ideal.[/QUOTE]
Well, it's about time.
ITT: People think that you need a government in order to have morals.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;15476721]Except that as a former anarchist I can tell you you're wrong, and so I will.
You are wrong.[/QUOTE]
Okay, opinion noted.
[QUOTE=Squad;15476662]Except diamonds... Lots and lots of diamonds... Which are money... Which means... oh forget it you are an idiot.[/QUOTE]
Diamonds from Africa are generally frivolous and worthless. What diamonds we need and use for real purposes aside from the aesthetic are abundant in many more accessible and less turbulent places, with no need to deal with the unceasing political changes, genocides and atrocities that have plagued Africa for its entire existence.
I'm not talking about pretty rocks people want on their finger, I'm talking shit that is actually worth two cents in the real world. Especially that, when you look at it from the perspective of anarchy, diamonds are worth zilch, the big diamonds at least. The little diamonds we actually use can be produced in a lab or found in less flashy diamond mines.
[QUOTE=Paramud;15477446]ITT: People think that you need a government in order to have morals.[/QUOTE]
ITT: Person who thinks morals would mean anything without a government.
[QUOTE=Lankist;15469205]Live in Somalia then.[/QUOTE]
There's a difference between a failed state, and anarchy. The reason Somalia turned into a failed state was because there was so much war and famine. The only way anarchy could work was if there was some sort of transitional phase. But that's been tried too, and failed (*cough* soviet union)
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;15478562]There's a difference between a failed state, and anarchy. The reason Somalia turned into a failed state was because there was so much war and famine. The only way anarchy could work was if there was some sort of transitional phase. But that's been tried too, and failed (*cough* soviet union)[/QUOTE]
When a nation's government is so small that it cannot enforce its own laws, it is essentially nonexistent. That qualifies for anarchy.
Fine, that's anarchy in it's literal term. Not an anarchist state.
so teenagers can feel tough and smart
[QUOTE=JohnEdwards;15478620]so teenagers can feel tough and smart[/QUOTE]
More or less.
There's really 2 forms of anarchy. there's the teenage "aNARCH3Y!!!1!" AND then there's the communal [I][U][B]anarchist state[/B][/U][/I]. There have already been plenty of communal societies, but they are usually embedded within normal countries, so it's nothing mass scale generally.
In conclusion, anarchy in it's realistic state is like community government. There's no way to have a society with a [I]complete[/I] lack of government.
They're also generally easy to wipe off the face of the Earth.
[editline]06:04AM[/editline]
i.e. Native Americans.
[editline]06:04AM[/editline]
my name is dances with wolves white devil
-.-
Native Americans weren't really communal in a modern sense, they were tribal. For example, take a small town in Buttfuck, Iowa, and then remove all influence from the federal, and state governments, and that's the sort of thing I am talking about. A small community, that governs itself municipally.
Now you're just playing semantics.
No, now you are just being dense.
There's a big difference between a native American tribe; one that weaves baskets and lives in tipis, and the communal living I am talking about. Maybe if you actually read my fucking post, you'll get what I just wrote above into your skull.
Define "communal"
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;15478696]-.-
Native Americans weren't really communal in a modern sense, they were tribal. For example, take a small town in Buttfuck, Iowa, and then remove all influence from the federal, and state governments, and that's the sort of thing I am talking about. A small community, that governs itself municipally.[/QUOTE]
It's communal if your minister of education is an NDP scumbag.
[QUOTE=Lankist;15478736]Define "communal"[/QUOTE]
communes bro :350:
[QUOTE=Lostangeles4;15478959]communes bro :350:[/QUOTE]
Seriously, though, I've searched for whatever fucking definition of "communal" he's talking about but the only definitions out there elaborate on the fact that "communal" is simply an adjective used to attribute the characteristic of a community, antithesis to isolationism.
The natives were a fucking community, they lived, slept and ate together based not on personal gain or property but purely for the good of the whole. That's a fucking communal existence. Time period doesn't matter, it's not like communes are a new idea.
[editline]06:42AM[/editline]
I can't wait another hour for him to come up with whatever illegitimate definition he's cooked up in his own head, I'll check back to see what nonsense he's spewed tomorrow.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
