I don't believe in cops, bosses or politicians, some call that Anarchism.
I call it having a fucking heart that beats.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;41293640]in that case you've just formed an impromptu state[/QUOTE]
the community militia is not a standing army, nor is it a rigid organization with hierarchy and leadership. the community militia is a concept of community mobilization. many members within a community have taken the role of fighting foreign invasion or statist coercion upon themselves.
ideally that is all the militia would participate in. it WOULD be incredibly statist for community militias to participate in "law enforcement" since it would just lead to unjust vigilantism.
[editline]3rd July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Arc Nova;41301234]I don't believe in cops, bosses or politicians, some call that Anarchism.
I call it having a fucking heart that beats.[/QUOTE]
i do believe in freedom, and never giving up. call my methods madness or call them luck.
i do what i got to, to be able to breathe.
I still don't get what exactly would prevent individuals from forming a sate. Can someone please tell me how this would be prevented in more detail. What if the individual or group was militia sponsored?
[QUOTE=matt000024;41301412]I still don't get what exactly would prevent individuals from forming a sate. Can someone please tell me how this would be prevented in more detail. What if the individual or group was militia sponsored?[/QUOTE]
put simply, the only thing preventing a state would be the people. the only thing preventing fascism, democracy, nazism, stalinism, socialism, etc., is the people and their willingness to adopt such a system. anarchism is about mobilizing, educating, and agitating people into a state where they no longer feel authority is relevant or useful in their lives anymore. a state cannot form if people don't believe in the state.
[QUOTE=soccerskyman;41299263]Alright, I need some books on anarchism to add to the OP. Any suggestions?[/QUOTE]
[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=soccerskyman;41299263]Also, MUSIC![/Quote]
[video=youtube;WD6gn5jQTkM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD6gn5jQTkM&list=PL69AF60B65A031761[/video]
[video=youtube;pCnEAH5wCzo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCnEAH5wCzo&list=PL2A26454AA23AE056[/video]
[video=youtube;G6O0Erj0hkc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6O0Erj0hkc&list=PL2A26454AA23AE056[/video]
I hate bringing up that I'm an anarchist because people have the stereotypical image in their head already
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41301627]put simply, the only thing preventing a state would be the people. the only thing preventing fascism, democracy, nazism, stalinism, socialism, etc., is the people and their willingness to adopt such a system. anarchism is about mobilizing, educating, and agitating people into a state where they no longer feel authority is relevant or useful in their lives anymore. a state cannot form if people don't believe in the state.[/QUOTE]
So the only way to get anarchism to work would be through large-scale propaganda and indoctrination, something that would require an authoritative state?
[QUOTE=RobbL;41302506]So the only way to get anarchism to work would be through large-scale propaganda and indoctrination, something that would require an authoritative state?[/QUOTE]
i didn't say any of that so no it wouldn't require any of that.
[QUOTE]anarchism is about mobilizing, educating, and agitating people into a state where they no longer feel authority is relevant or useful in their lives anymore[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Arc Nova;41301813]I hate bringing up that I'm an anarchist because people have the stereotypical image in their head already[/QUOTE]
idgaf about the stereotype for anarchists. the only way to change the anarchist image is by people doing anarchist things and not necessarily being part of the stereotype.
[editline]3rd July 2013[/editline]
and robbl it might be helpful to read my posts before you quote them. when did i say indoctrination, propoganda, or that we need an authoritative state to educate people?
[editline]3rd July 2013[/editline]
anarchism is about bottom-up organization so it would be silly for me to endorse something that requires top-down organization.
How do you achieve what I quoted then?
community organization.
For it to not be indoctrination or forceful you would have to assume that anarchism is objectively the best form of society, and then you'd have to assume that upon educating people through giving them objective facts about it the majority would become anarchists themselves
And then still you'd have the problem of groups people trying to set up authority over communities for personal gain no matter their political views
not necessarily. the idea is that you begin teaching people how to take care of themselves and each other and government actions become unnecessary through it. if a community knows how to take care of their homeless, why would we need state sponsored homeless shelters? if a workplace is able to form their own labor union and organize work by themselves, why do they need bosses?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41302775]community organization.[/QUOTE]
The state is inevitable as communities expand and need to organize themselves more efficiently.
you forget that the idea of anarchist organization is fundamentally different from other forms of organization because it relies on voluntary participation. you can't just assert authority over a community, the community has to voluntarily relinquish their authority to you.
Anarchism is impossible in modern society no exceptions. For anarchism to ever work you have to change human nature and that will never happen.
[QUOTE=butre;41303226]Anarchism is impossible in modern society no exceptions. For anarchism to ever work you have to change human nature and that will never happen.[/QUOTE]
“But what about human nature? Can it be changed? And if not, will it endure under Anarchism?
Poor human nature, what horrible crimes have been committed in thy name! Every fool, from king to policeman, from the flatheaded parson to the visionless dabbler in science, presumes to speak authoritatively of human nature. The greater the mental charlatan, the more definite his insistence on the wickedness and weaknesses of human nature. Yet, how can any one speak of it today, with every soul in a prison, with every heart fettered, wounded, and maimed?
John Burroughs has stated that experimental study of animals in captivity is absolutely useless. Their character, their habits, their appetites undergo a complete transformation when torn from their soil in field and forest. With human nature caged in a narrow space, whipped daily into submission, how can we speak of its potentialities?
Freedom, expansion, opportunity, and, above all, peace and repose, alone can teach us the real dominant factors of human nature and all its wonderful possibilities.
Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations.
This is not a wild fancy or an aberration of the mind. It is the conclusion arrived at by hosts of intellectual men and women the world over; a conclusion resulting from the close and studious observation of the tendencies of modern society: individual liberty and economic equality, the twin forces for the birth of what is fine and true in man.”
come on use an argument that hasn't been rebutted a hundred years ago.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41302968]The state is inevitable as communities expand and need to organize themselves more efficiently.[/QUOTE]
This is my main problem with anarchism. We are moving to a type one civilization but for that to happen the world must be connected and for the most part unified. With the internet and the EU, NATO these are all parts to a type 1 civilization, an interconnected world. How would an anarchy world band for the most part together with all a country/continent power to produce advancements for the human race.
[editline]4th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41303274]
Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations.
[/QUOTE]
That isn't quite possible at the moment as resources in the world is scarce and we don't have the technology to produce stuff endlessly (nano factories)
resources in the world are hardly scarce at all. we have an abundance of everything we need. capitalism is the problem since it distributes the resources unfairly.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41303358]resources in the world are hardly scarce at all. we have an abundance of everything we need. capitalism is the problem since it distributes the resources unfairly.[/QUOTE]
If that is the case then we would run out very quickly if we were to provide everyone with the same resources. Rare metals that make our modern computers and technologies such has platinum, gold, palladium are scarce. Fuel, oil (plastics) and also nuclear fuel is not an infinite source. Cheap food will take mass amount of land clearing, wood used to produce homes etc. I would like to have equal distribution of resources for everyone but our technology is not there to make this happen yet, this is all under the nano factory research which will be amazing when it is finally possible.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41303358]resources in the world are hardly scarce at all. we have an abundance of everything we need. capitalism is the problem since it distributes the resources unfairly.[/QUOTE]
And how would your anarchy distribute the resources? Socialists would argue for a state to do such a thing.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;41292551]Did you mean Fascism, because I've never met anyone who thought that type of thing was cool (excluding one person whos great grandfather was in the SS, but they've since abandoned those ideals).
Even "Anarchism" as of late seems to be not as popular as it was, it's all about Libertarianism now.[/QUOTE]
Fascist here -- don't mind me, just passing through
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41303358]resources in the world are hardly scarce at all. we have an abundance of everything we need. capitalism is the problem since it distributes the resources unfairly.[/QUOTE]
I assume the resources are simply fairly distributed by some for of gove- oh wait.
I assume that the resources are also protected from the people who govern the la- fuck, nevermind
[QUOTE=striker453;41303460]If that is the case then we would run out very quickly if we were to provide everyone with the same resources. Rare metals that make our modern computers and technologies such has platinum, gold, palladium are scarce. Fuel, oil (plastics) and also nuclear fuel is not an infinite source. Cheap food will take mass amount of land clearing, wood used to produce homes etc. I would like to have equal distribution of resources for everyone but our technology is not there to make this happen yet, this is all under the nano factory research which will be amazing when it is finally possible.[/QUOTE]
so there isn't enough resources in the world for everyone to have a computer? there isn't enough land for everyone to have food? there isn't enough sun for everyone to have energy?
maybe the primitivists are right and we should just re-wild in that case.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41303477]And how would your anarchy distribute the resources? Socialists would argue for a state to do such a thing.[/QUOTE]
i'm a socialist and don't believe in the state. worker's councils working with community councils to secure goods would be preferable to any state planning.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41303709]so there isn't enough resources in the world for everyone to have a computer? there isn't enough land for everyone to have food? there isn't enough sun for everyone to have energy?
[/QUOTE]
Solar energy requires land, let alone to power 7 billion people. The only way to power the world is either through fusion (which isn't a thing yet) or nuclear. According to you we need to give everyone food so that also requires land where are we getting all this land from? Not all land in the world can be used to build upon the world resources is not infinite I don't know where you got that idea from. We also need forest to sustain the ecosystem and also our wood supply. Even more of a problem how are we going to hand out resources to 7 billion people equally without a government or a huge group of people controlling the distribution of these resources.
[QUOTE=striker453;41303460]If that is the case then we would run out very quickly if we were to provide everyone with the same resources. Rare metals that make our modern computers and technologies such has platinum, gold, palladium are scarce. .[/QUOTE]
Do we really need all that? Humanity has survived without computers for years. if you really want it, then just loot one from a store when/if a revolution happens.
[QUOTE=Fuckitbucket;41303810]Do we really need all that? Humanity has survived without computers for years. if you really want it, then just loot one from a store when/if a revolution happens.[/QUOTE]
We a modern society the internet is one of the greatest thing we ever made. A way for the world to connect to each other. For us to push further we would need the information and intellect of every person in the world to work together to further our interest. We made amazing discoveries ever since the world became more connected as information for discoveries flowed freely between scientist and engineers.
[QUOTE=striker453;41303804]Solar energy requires land, let alone to power 7 billion people. The only way to power the world is either through fusion (which isn't a thing yet) or nuclear. According to you we need to give everyone food so that also requires land where are we getting all this land from? Not all land in the world can be used to build upon the world resources is not infinite I don't know where you got that idea from. We also need forest to sustain the ecosystem and also our wood supply. Even more of a problem how are we going to hand out resources to 7 billion people equally without a government or a huge group of people controlling the distribution of these resources.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://modernsurvivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/USA-population-density-per-square-mile.jpg[/img]
we are not hurting for land dude, at least in the usa.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41303920][img]http://modernsurvivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/USA-population-density-per-square-mile.jpg[/img]
we are not hurting for land dude, at least in the usa.[/QUOTE]
How much of that land is desert landscape? or volcanic plains? how much of that land is cultivable? How much land do you want to dedicate to solar power or wind? Mind you we can't build solar power too far from the populace as power degrades in wire. In Australia most of our land is salt pans and the desert with only a small portion being capable for cultivation.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.