Spain's Communist Village Is Making The Rest Of The World Look Bad - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142699]mediation prolly[/QUOTE] What if mediation isn't possible? How do you compromise what to do with a cow? You either keep it alive to milk it or kill it for its meat. Who gets to decide what to do when both parties cannot compromise? And why would anyone outside the argument even care?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142754]i don't.[/QUOTE] Then try giving a more detailed explanation instead of just saying "this probably".

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;43142729]but one of the biggest reasons why rape is so hard to convict is lack of evidence, and you didnt give me an alternative cause either way, if someone condemns him innocent or guilty in a hearsay crime such as rape, someone has a higher authority to deem it so, and the community may elect that authority like we elect judges or simply majority voteit that kind of sounds like a government or mob rule, not anarchy im not pro-capitalist or saying our system right now is perfect, i just think anarchism in general is silly cause it contradicts itself, it sounds more like a direct democracy rather than anarchy from what ive been reading here[/QUOTE] well whats your alternative? do you think people should be able to get convicted on hearsay? and like, i dunno, i believe in volunteer society, i don't think rapists would want volunteer to be part of a society that condemns rape, i don't think rape is a human problem i think it is a societal problem or a mental one. maybe it would take awhile to get to the point where rape doesn't happen anymore (or in the cases it does, it's because someones a nutcase or whatever) and maybe some authority (such as banishment, execution etc) would have to be used up until that point. it's not like you can just flick the switch and anarchy is there, it has to be worked towards i guess

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;43142758]Then try giving a more detailed explanation instead of just saying "this probably".[/QUOTE] i already provided the wiki articles. these systems are preferable to the court system because they encourage active participation from all parties. it isn't a "magical cure", it's a realistic alternative to traditional "legal justice"

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;43142745]Why do you think this will automatically fix everything?[/QUOTE] you can't fix everything

whenever i provide an alternative it's "oh this can't fix everything" or "oh this has a problem, it's imperfect" no shit, we live in an imperfect world populated by imperfect beings. not only are none of the traditional structures you guys advocate "perfect", they are not even adequate in a modern world. they are antiquated and have been shown time and time again to fail to meet the needs of individuals and collectives. the solutions i or other anarchists might come up with might not be perfect, but they seek to replace the non-functional structures with something that might at least provide a framework that we can improve upon.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43142766]well whats your alternative? do you think people should be able to get convicted on hearsay? and like, i dunno, i believe in volunteer society, i don't think rapists would want volunteer to be part of a society that condemns rape, i don't think rape is a human problem i think it is a societal problem or a mental one. maybe it would take awhile to get to the point where rape doesn't happen anymore (or in the cases it does, it's because someones a nutcase or whatever) and maybe some authority (such as banishment, execution etc) would have to be used up until that point. it's not like you can just flick the switch and anarchy is there, it has to be worked towards i guess[/QUOTE] i dont have an alternate and i wont ever propose one because im not educated enough to propose such but what i am saying is that the very idea of anarchy collapses on itself when its against authority and oppression, but solutions such as decision-making on crime or economics is inevitably based on 'consensus' which allows one group to have authority on another, and oppress that group whether it's a majority rule to force a decision or a minority protest to force a non-decision im not saying capitalism is better or there is a better alternative, im just saying the anarchy as a system is hypocritical

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43142660] hearsay? yes, it's illegal because it's known to be bullshit and isn't useful in coming to proper conclusions, so i'm fairly sure having the knowledge that hearsay can't be used anarchist courts wouldn't use it [/QUOTE] It's illegal for the same reason we have all those other rules in court: justice is pretty much the worst thing you can leave to the public, and objectivity needs constant vigilance and strict rules.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;43142808]It's illegal for the same reason we have all those other rules in court: justice is pretty much the worst thing you can leave to the public, and objectivity needs constant vigilance and strict rules.[/QUOTE] yet we have juries chosen of 12 members of the public? [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] "As of 2013, studies that compared recidivism rates are becoming more definitive and in favor of Restorative Justice. Some older studies showed mixed results. [47][49] While some studies claim modest, relative reductions,[50][51][52][53] more recent studies are finding significant and meaningful reductions in recidivism rates (see below)." combine this with overhauling the economic and political structures in a way that will likely make less people commit crimes in the first place and you have a system of justice that will begin to actually comprehensively touch on "criminality" and "antisocial behavior".

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142791]whenever i provide an alternative it's "oh this can't fix everything" or "oh this has a problem, it's imperfect" no shit, we live in an imperfect world populated by imperfect beings. not only are none of the traditional structures you guys advocate "perfect", they are not even adequate in a modern world. they are antiquated and have been shown time and time again to fail to meet the needs of individuals and collectives. the solutions i or other anarchists might come up with might not be perfect, but they seek to replace the non-functional structures with something that might at least provide a framework that we can improve upon.[/QUOTE] But you don't have a framework you can improve upon. We do. All you can do is hope everybody shares the same philosophy.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;43142848]But you don't have a framework you can improve upon. We do. All you can do is hope everybody shares the same philosophy.[/QUOTE] your framework has been proven to be fundamentally broken empirically and morally. it has shown itself to be an antique. instead of trying to prop up a rotten structure, we seek to replace it with a new frame. just because you put your fingers in your ears and say "no you have no framework", it doesn't make it true.

Yeah, stupid, how can you believe in that old framework? Our new framework is so much better. It's called no framework, despite the fact that I just said that our new framework isn't actually no framework, it actually is no framework by definition. It's basically framework 2.0. Or Framework 0.0 if you will.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;43142894]it actually is no framework by definition. [/QUOTE] how? you can't just say things to make them true, no matter how much capitalist-apologists wish they could.

Anarchy is a society without government, no? How can you expect to enforce something like a societal framework without people willing to enforce it? If you have people enforcing it, then those people are acting as a governing body aka a government.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;43142912]Anarchy is a society without government, no? How can you expect to enforce something like a societal framework without people willing to enforce it? If you have people enforcing it, then those people are acting as a governing body aka a government.[/QUOTE] in that case you have no framework either because people don't follow the current framework as it is.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142791]whenever i provide an alternative it's "oh this can't fix everything" or "oh this has a problem, it's imperfect" no shit, we live in an imperfect world populated by imperfect beings. not only are none of the traditional structures you guys advocate "perfect", they are not even adequate in a modern world. they are antiquated and have been shown time and time again to fail to meet the needs of individuals and collectives. the solutions i or other anarchists might come up with might not be perfect, but they seek to replace the non-functional structures with something that might at least provide a framework that we can improve upon.[/QUOTE] They don't fail to meet expectations, they fail because no one is doing the proper job of maintaining them. [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] Thats my issue with installing any new system, no shit when no one is paying attention or being fully active the system will crumble. Especially democracies and capitalism.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142919]in that case you have no framework either because people don't follow the current framework as it is.[/QUOTE] but either way, the framework you're proposing is not anarchy at all because someone has the authority decides who is innocent or who is guilty of a crime, anarchy is against that, is it not?

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;43142934]but either way, the framework you're proposing is not anarchy at all because someone has the authority decides who is innocent or who is guilty of a crime, anarchy is against that, is it not?[/QUOTE] Anarchy in its purest form is basically no rules, it doesn't last long because say someone takes your apple, as soon as you try to take it back, you've just put down the rule that theft is wrong.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142872]your framework has been proven to be fundamentally broken empirically and morally. it has shown itself to be an antique. instead of trying to prop up a rotten structure, we seek to replace it with a new frame. just because you put your fingers in your ears and say "no you have no framework", it doesn't make it true.[/QUOTE] Your framework is based entirely on the idea of people naturally working together toward for the greater community. My framework is based off rules and systems. When a rule or system doesn't work, it can always be fixed for improved. When people don't behave how your philosophy says they should, there's nothing you can do. Unless you want to [I]make [/I]them.

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;43142934]but either way, the framework you're proposing is not anarchy at all because someone has the authority decides who is innocent or who is guilty of a crime, anarchy is against that, is it not?[/QUOTE] no not really crime doesn't exist in an anarchist system because there isn't a traditional legal structure. it redefines the way we look at human action and seeks to hold people responsible for harmful actions in new ways that don't require a traditional legal structure. [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] and it's not "anarchy". it's "anarchism" or "anarchist system". "anarchy" means chaos and disorder, "anarchism" requires order and participation.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142945]no not really crime doesn't exist in an anarchist system because there isn't a traditional legal structure. it redefines the way we look at human action and seeks to hold people responsible for harmful actions in new ways that don't require a traditional legal structure. [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] and it's not "anarchy". it's "anarchism" or "anarchist system". "anarchy" means chaos and disorder, "anarchism" requires order and participation.[/QUOTE] but someone has to say this person is responsible for this harmful action? whether it'd be a group or individual vote saying he or she is or is not responsible for the harmful action, that's still authority

[QUOTE=Swilly;43142925]Thats my issue with installing any new system, no shit when no one is paying attention or being fully active the system will crumble.[/QUOTE] the problem is that our systems of hierarchy and imposition of authority breed apathy because people don't feel like they have a real say in any outcomes. participation in a system is higher when you feel you have actual power in the decisions being made.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142905]how? you can't just say things to make them true, no matter how much capitalist-apologists wish they could.[/QUOTE] Capitalism made it possible for you to get your computer to post these things on. I'm skeptical such a thing could be made and spread out across the globe in an anarchist society.

It sounds great, but I'd rather work on improving democracy and applying socialist tendencies to public policy so that the quality of life is assured to the many and that all have an equal chance of success in their own work. Maybe then we could start pushing toward your framework, but until we get an even playing field, your system will literally blow up in your face.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142960]the problem is that our systems of hierarchy and imposition of authority breed apathy because people don't feel like they have a real say in any outcomes. participation in a system is higher when you feel you have actual power in the decisions being made.[/QUOTE] The reason we elect representatives is so we don't have to spend half our day, every day, informing ourselves about every little issue so we can vote on it. [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Swilly;43142963]It sounds great, but I'd rather work on improving democracy and applying socialist tendencies to public policy so that the quality of life is assured to the many and that all have an equal chance of success in their own work. Maybe then we could start pushing toward your framework, but until we get an even playing field, your system will literally blow up in your face.[/QUOTE] To be fair, I don't think he once claimed we should change to anarchy over night.

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;43142958]but someone has to say this person is responsible for this harmful action? whether it'd be a group or individual vote saying he or she is or is not responsible for the harmful action, that's still authority[/QUOTE] not in the conventional way you might immediately think of. and "anarchism is order without power", it means that authority must be legitimate to be exercised. noam chomsky actually defines anarchism like this: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G6kf7XM9Nk[/media] [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;43142961]Capitalism made it possible for you to get your computer to post these things on. I'm skeptical such a thing could be made and spread out across the globe in an anarchist society.[/QUOTE] if we can't have computers without capitalism and slave labor then maybe we shouldn't have computers.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142960]the problem is that our systems of hierarchy and imposition of authority breed apathy because people don't feel like they have a real say in any outcomes. participation in a system is higher when you feel you have actual power in the decisions being made.[/QUOTE] At least in the US, our apathy is actually both the governments and the public's fault. 1/4th of the people can't read past the 8th grade level, which is a failing of the education system. It also doesn't help that most Americans don't actually understand the US system, its constitution and the reason why and how our government functions. If they did, I don't think we'd have nearly the same problems we do. Our apathy is also because the US public as a whole, wants everything to be hunkie dorie in the end. Anything that makes us sad or challenges our status quo is usually met with glare, 'edge' and apthatic looks.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43142978]not in the conventional way you might immediately think of. and "anarchism is order without power", it means that authority must be legitimate to be exercised. noam chomsky actually defines anarchism like this: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G6kf7XM9Nk[/media] [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] if we can't have computers without capitalism and slave labor then maybe we shouldn't have computers.[/QUOTE] but who decides that authority is legitimate? what if i say that authority isn't legitimate to me and have nothing on me?

This then in turn means that the government is fairly close to flying without a pilot as most American's don't focus on the important part which is your local level. Federal Government has a lot of control, but most of the stuff we get dinged with is in the local level to state level.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43125960]Thats still an absolutely minuscule amount of people. On that scale I'm sure you could even get Fascism to work wonderfully.[/QUOTE] "[I]even[/I] fascism" I dunno, Mussolini's pre-war Italy wasn't actually that bad, and received international praise for how things were being run there. Fascism is only perceived as a bad thing because people are told in schools that the Nazis were fascists (they weren't - authoritarianism != fascism) and anything associated with Nazism is automatically absolutely terrible.