Anarchists - General - Facepunch Forum

[QUOTE=lmaoboat;18448004]Just because they call themselves communist doesn't mean they are.[/QUOTE] Prove to me that they arn't. I see no reason to think that they are something else.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448014][China is] thriving because of the vast investments made in it by the western world, and western corporations. And this is the biggest reason they are not legitimate communists. You think real communism would have allowed privately-owned corporations, let alone foreign ones?[/QUOTE] @Aman: THIS.

[QUOTE=Wakka V2;18447986]Haha, it's cute how you speak for all of humanity and think you're right. Anarchy has been predominant since before feudal times and communes have worked wonderfully in small communities.[/QUOTE] I meant in the modern world, don't be a smartass and point out other things that my statement wasn't directed towards.

Anarchy is like communism, it looks wonderful on paper, but in action it fails. Also, anarchy != violence and destruction.

No one runs their countries strictly by the definition of their government. There are little spin off and diversions from the "true" form because the true form cannot exist. China isn't 100% through and through communism, but that doesn't mean it isn't communism outright. The U.S. isnt 100% true democracy as a comparison.

I heard anarchists sand their faces.

[QUOTE=Aman V;18448102]No one runs their countries strictly by the definition of their government. China isn't 100% through and through communism, but that doesn't mean it isn't communism outright. The U.S. isnt 100% true democracy as a comparison.[/QUOTE] Only fools believe the United States is a Democracy. It's a Republic.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448116]Only fools believe the United States is a Democracy. It's a Republic.[/QUOTE] I didn't say I believed it was. Some people do though.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448116]Only fools believe the United States is a Democracy. It's a Republic.[/QUOTE] It is a democracy you fool. Not a direct democracy, but a democracy none the less.

[QUOTE=gamefreek76;18448176]It is a democracy you fool. Not a direct democracy, but a democracy none the less.[/QUOTE] Look up 'republic'.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448185]Look up 'republic'.[/QUOTE] It's still a democracy. We vote for our representatives.

Fuckin no dick retards.

[QUOTE=Aman V;18448043]Prove to me that they arn't. I see no reason to think that they are something else.[/QUOTE] Major corporations and global chains are all over the place. If you go to China, you'll see Pizza Huts, McDonalds, and Apple Stores. And let's not forget that China is the #1 stop for cheap child labor for making commercial goods.

[QUOTE=Aman V;18448102]No one runs their countries strictly by the definition of their government. There are little spin off and diversions from the "true" form because the true form cannot exist. China isn't 100% through and through communism, but that doesn't mean it isn't communism outright. The U.S. isnt 100% true democracy as a comparison.[/QUOTE] China isn't even fucking close to communist.

The idea behind anarchy is that the people with set fourth they own set of morals and conduct and yattah yattah, but without government/protection, nothings stopping as homoerotic as it sounds, a guy like Joker from the Dark Night from fucking the place over. The better form of 'anarchy' is a pure democracy. Then the people have their own say and are able to set fourth governing rules. [editline]10:50PM[/editline] [QUOTE=gamefreek76;18448193]It's still a democracy. We vote for our representatives.[/QUOTE] That's called a republic.

[QUOTE=Neolk;18448313]The idea behind anarchy is that the people with set fourth they own set of morals and conduct and yattah yattah, but without government/protection, nothings stopping as homoerotic as it sounds, a guy like Joker from the Dark Night from fucking the place over. [editline]10:50PM[/editline] That's called a republic.[/QUOTE] People have nothing to fear from one or two men. It's when organizations band together (99.9% of the time religious) and decide to seize power to protect their own interests.

Anarchy hasn't any true form. It's mostly used to describe a faction of a ideology, like anarcho-capitalism, or anarcho-communism.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448329]People have nothing to fear from one or two men. It's when organizations band together (99.9% of the time religious) and decide to seize power to protect their own interests.[/QUOTE] When their interests are raping and pillaging they just continue with their interests anyway. Point is things like government deter people from breaking government's rules. In an anarchy, your throat would get slit for bread.

[QUOTE=Neolk;18448347]When their interests are raping and pillaging they just continue with their interests anyway. Point is things like government deter people from breaking government's rules. In an anarchy, your throat would get slit for bread.[/QUOTe] Read the OP CAREFULLY.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448357]Read the OP CAREFULLY.[/QUOTE] ? OP's message is "I sorta think anarchy is a nice idea" and "look at these fags, they are fags." What part do you want me to see?

when it came time to throw bricks through that starbucks window you left me all alone all alone :(

[QUOTE=Neolk;18448404]? OP's message is "I sorta think anarchy is a nice idea" and "look at these fags, they are fags." What part do you want me to see?[/QUOTE] The part that is the definition of anarchy. How it's more about having no government than no laws. That's why I said some group would always seize power.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448443]The part that is the definition of anarchy. How it's more about having no government than no laws. That's why I said some group would always seize power.[/QUOTE] I mean, without government there are no laws to begin with. I was simply referring to the perfect scenario. Yes, I agree a group will likely seize power. However, even if it didn't without any rulers to keep the psychos in check, anything goes. Women would be raped in the street. Why? Because the strong survive in anarchy and women would likely be unable to fight back. There'd be no point in jobs, it would simply be a cycle of mooching and stealing. Blood would likely stain the already blood-stained ground.

[QUOTE=Neolk;18448495]I mean, without government there are no laws to begin with. I was simply referring to the perfect scenario. Yes, I agree a group will likely seize power. However, even if it didn't without any rulers to keep the psychos in check, anything goes. Women would be raped in the street. Why? Because the strong survive in anarchy and women would likely be unable to fight back. There'd be no point in jobs, it would simply be a cycle of mooching and stealing. Blood would likely stain the already blood-stained ground.[/QUOTE] Aye, there's truth in that. In any case, we're in agreement that the supporters of anarchy are naive/gullible and it would never work in practical application on a large scale.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18448516]Aye, there's truth in that. In any case, we're in agreement that the supporters of anarchy are naive/gullible and it would never work in practical application on a large scale.[/QUOTE] Yes, quite so. Pip pip and all that.

Hi there. Communism fails because it has no mechanism for cost-benefit analysis, but total socialism works fine in small, voluntary groups of people, IE families. Making an analogy between communism and anarchism is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard of, they're more different than the Sun and Pluto. One is liberal and anarchic, the other is socialist and totalitarian. There are "socialist" branches of anarchism, but in effect they do not differ from the "capitalistic" branches of anarchism, it's simply different ideas of how an anarchic society would (READ: not SHOULD) work and they can coexist just fine.

[QUOTE=TheAnarchist;18448562]Hi there. Communism fails because it has no mechanism for cost-benefit analysis, but total socialism works fine in small, voluntary groups of people, IE families. Making an analogy between communism and anarchism is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard of, they're more different than the Sun and Pluto. One is liberal and anarchic, the other is socialist and totalitarian. There are "socialist" branches of anarchism, but in effect they do not differ from the "capitalistic" branches of anarchism, it's simply different ideas of how an anarchic society would (READ: not SHOULD) work and they can coexist just fine.[/QUOTE] Aye, socialism can work in families and groups of close friends. Mark that the people involved should be close and have some level of affection for each other so that they would tolerate such a system.

[QUOTE=TheAnarchist;18448562]Hi there. Communism fails because it has no mechanism for cost-benefit analysis, but total socialism works fine in small, voluntary groups of people, IE families. Making an analogy between communism and anarchism is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard of, they're more different than the Sun and Pluto. One is liberal and anarchic, the other is socialist and totalitarian. There are "socialist" branches of anarchism, but in effect they do not differ from the "capitalistic" branches of anarchism, it's simply different ideas of how an anarchic society would (READ: not SHOULD) work and they can coexist just fine.[/QUOTE] I mean in theory communism is simply a form of market government, essentially simply stating what role the government has within the market and what the said market looks like. There is no reason why you couldn't have a Communistic Democracy, or a Communistic Anarchy.

Libertarianism is the next best thing.

Poor anarchy. I feel bad for it. I feel bad for the serious anarchists throughout history whose image is now forever destroyed by modern anarchists. This is an anarchist: [IMG]http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x309/JohnnyMo1/randy-Other_Spooner_Hi_Res-1.jpg[/IMG] This is a dickhead: [IMG]http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x309/JohnnyMo1/anarchist.jpg[/IMG]