Anarchy

[Iliad]

why are you making a decision that involves me?

i can understand if we need eachothers help that you would ask for it, but i dont understand why you would try to make decisions for other people.

Say there is a problem. Say there is a difference of opinion. Who would choose then?

[Anarchist]

what problem?

gay marriage?
a forest fire?
im smoking and you dont like it?

[Iliad]

what problem?

gay marriage?
a forest fire?
im smoking and you dont like it?

No I'm talking about a big decision. Say if the country is thinking about making a couple of new nuclear reactors. Of course not everyone would be happy. Say I am for it, but you are not. Who chooses?

For other issues?

[Anarchist]

well i would imagine first we should know why your building another one of those things that we probably dont need, wind energy is a hell of alot safer then nuclear anyway. Your planning on building a WMD?

If your building it for energy purposes i would suggest something thats more reliable, a lot safer, and something thats a bit less dependent on people making sure it doesnt blow up. poor choice in energy.

I wont help you build it, good luck finding the materials and the people that will

Anyone want to help Illiad build a nuclear reactor and maintain it?

(oh, and in a anarchist society there is no country)

[Iliad]

well i would imagine first we should know why your building another one of those things that we probably dont need, wind energy is a hell of alot safer then nuclear anyway. Your planning on building a WMD?

If your building it for energy purposes i would suggest something thats more reliable, a lot safer, and something thats a bit less dependent on people making sure it doesnt blow up. poor choice in energy.

I wont help you build it, good luck finding the materials and the people that will

Anyone want to help Illiad build a nuclear reactor and maintain it?

I meant that as an example. Now answer the question. I didn't say I wanted to build it, I said that someone else is building and I agree, yet you don't. So who makes the decision. Please actually answer the question.

What about if about 10 soldiers get captured in another country, like what happened to Britain. What do we do? OF course there will be different opinions. Some will want to use force, others diplomacy,etc. So what happens? Seriously understand that governments do a lot of things.

[Anarchist]

What about if about 10 soldiers get captured in another country, like what happened to Britain. What do we do? OF course there will be different opinions. Some will want to use force, others diplomacy,etc. So what happens? Seriously understand that governments do a lot of things.

Anarchy means there is no state, meaning there cant be any soldiers
Meaning that soldiers cant be captured, because they dont exist!
how can you invade a country that doesnt exist? If ten people were kidnapped i would suggest their friends figure out who did it. Ofcourse i have no idea why someone would kidnap someone for the sheer pleasure of it. Since there would be no material purpose nor reward for it.

Those soldiers were captured near Iran, if it wasnt for governments they would have been in the pub. Government caused that situation by being there and by existing.

I meant that as an example. Now answer the question. I didn't say I wanted to build it, I said that someone else is building and I agree, yet you don't. So who makes the decision. Please actually answer the question.

Well if you refuse to help him build it, and i dont even agree that it should be built. then that means that so far that guy doesnt have anyone to help him build it. which means he cant. it doesnt get built unless he has the people to help him do it

[Iliad]

What about if about 10 soldiers get captured in another country, like what happened to Britain. What do we do? OF course there will be different opinions. Some will want to use force, others diplomacy,etc. So what happens? Seriously understand that governments do a lot of things.

Anarchy means there is no state, meaning there cant be any soldiers
Meaning that soldiers cant be captured, because they dont exist!
how can you invade a country that doesnt exist? If ten people were kidnapped i would suggest their friends figure out who did it. Ofcourse i have no idea why someone would kidnap someone for the sheer pleasure of it. Since there would be no material purpose nor reward for it.

Those soldiers were captured near Iran, if it wasnt for governments they would have been in the pub. Government caused that situation by being there and by existing.

I meant that as an example. Now answer the question. I didn't say I wanted to build it, I said that someone else is building and I agree, yet you don't. So who makes the decision. Please actually answer the question.

Well if you refuse to help him build it, and i dont even agree that it should be built. then that means that so far that guy doesnt have anyone to help him build it. which means he cant. it doesnt get built unless he has the people to help him do it

I don't think you are getting my point. What if a decision has to be made? What happens? Just tell me what happens and stop avoiding the question.


Another point for you to consider: if there is no state will there be laws? If there are who writes them? Who decides to enforce them?

I hope you are not promoting a country without laws.

And anarchy will not happen because the revolution will not happen.
And the last point. When the Russian revolution happened do you think the leaders said:
"Hey guys let's overthrow the capitalist system! Let's have lots of people die, then let some maniac rise to power and stunt the growth of the whole country and everyone will live in fear of him! Wouldn't that be great!"
No. Right now there are so many flaws in anarchy it's not funny. If you think the government doesn't do anything you are seriously mistaken.

[Anarchist]

I hope that this will be my last post because its obvious that you are incapable of learning anything-(Follow the link)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

There are many forms of anarchy, but the basis, the principle is that there will be no country, there will be no laws, because noone is fit to write them. If you want protection, protect yourself etc... Dont hire Nazis to do it for you.

What if a decision needs to be made? like what? A Nuclear reactor?
If the people wont build it for themselves why should i force them to?
so i can make money? (which would probably also not exist) If a decision needs to be made that effects everybody, then everybody better agree with it or else they wont take part in it AKA do it yourself. (Do i have to answer your question a fourth time?)

The revolution may not happen, we will probably kill ourselves first.
The violent revolutions of the past have only created new versions of the same corrupt governments. There are so many flaws in anarchy because your still not even sure what it is, you ask me about a country without laws? No shit thats what anarchy is, but so much more! Its no Country

Governments cause problems, dont believe me? see the world?

[Iliad]

I hope that this will be my last post because its obvious that you are incapable of learning anything-(Follow the link)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

There are many forms of anarchy, but the basis, the principle is that there will be no country, there will be no laws, because noone is fit to write them. If you want protection, protect yourself etc... Dont hire Nazis to do it for you.

What if a decision needs to be made? like what? A Nuclear reactor?
If the people wont build it for themselves why should i force them to?
so i can make money? (which would probably also not exist) If a decision needs to be made that effects everybody, then everybody better agree with it or else they wont take part in it AKA do it yourself. (Do i have to answer your question a fourth time?)

The revolution may not happen, we will probably kill ourselves first.
The violent revolutions of the past have only created new versions of the same corrupt governments. There are so many flaws in anarchy because your still not even sure what it is, you ask me about a country without laws? No shit thats what anarchy is, but so much more! Its no Country

Governments cause problems, don't believe me? see the world?

You do realise as soon as that happens the crime rate will go so high. Protect yourself? Do you realise what will happen if there are no laws? There would be crime. People would steal and kill each other because there are no consequences. The community will be absolutely wrecked. You must seriously not understand why need laws.

[Anarchist]

"Even a whole society, a nation, or even all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the globe. They are only its possessors, its usufructuaries, and, like boni patres familias, they must hand it down to succeeding generations in an improved condition." (Marx)

crime would be eliminated when we remove the cause of the crime,
The reason we need police officers is to keep the sheep in line, It has been shown that the less restrictive a society, the less the need for further restrictions.

See drug use and Amsterdam

[Anarchist]

I believe I have realised why so many fail to understand the principle that is Anarchy and why it should be desired for all.

You see often when it is discussed its believed to be a political stance,
A system that lacks law and order, therefore promoting a chaotic enviroment where everyone takes care of themselves. This is due to a missunderstanding of the definition and meaning of True Anarchy.

Anarchy is a spiritual stance, by definition;
"The Negation Of All Oppressive Structures"
This applies not only to government but to any non-liberating organisation.
Individual thinking with openminded beliefs, Tolerance of our differences, and the natural desire for understanding.
This leads to the renouncing of our illusions of control.

The reason Anarchy is often mistaken as a simple abolishment of government is due to the fact that governments tend to grow corrupt and oppresive over time. Anarchy can fully exist with a well formed government on the condition that its existance liberates us all.

Organised Religion gives us guidelines and rules that it demands for us to follow. When the individual path is laid out differently for each and every one of us. To renounce organised religion is not to deny ones faith but to embrace our individual relationship with God.

The assumption that the elimination of oppressive structures such as government, religion, currency, fences, addiction, and violence will lead to chaos is based on our attachment to the illusion of control. The more we grasp to this illusion the greater our desperation and confusion becomes.

The proposed results of a leaderless society leading to slavery and violence is not Anarchy. Its the remnants of humanities desperation to appear in control by imposing oppresion on others.

By embracing Anarchy and renouncing the illusions of control, we will create a society dedicated to liberation. One built on equality and the elimination of class. Enjoying things as spirituality,sex,music and knowledge. The very things we desire are the things that liberate us!

The religious equivelant is ying-yang/male-female/good-evil
Anarchy is not the balance of Chaos and Order, Its the balance of Oppression and Liberation. Anarchy and Imperialism.

Enviromentally- To destroy a forest is an oppresive action, by destroying life and the home of its inhabitants, we are essentially denieing nature/the planets right to live.

Work- Work can be very liberating, if done out of free will and desire. When it becomes a means to survive it becomes oppressive and mandatory

sincerely,
The Anarcist Monk

[s.xkitten]

EEEK!...its a gigantic long post...

oh well, it was well thought out, and well written...

[Balsiefen]

the problem is not all people hold those views. if all people were like that it would work easily, the problem is people are bastards. they will abuse their system at every opertunity. the same happens with comunism they needed a strong gouvenment to make sure the system worked, stalin came in to power and it went down from there.

[chewyman]

the problem is not all people hold those views. if all people were like that it would work easily, the problem is people are bastards. they will abuse their system at every opertunity. the same happens with comunism they needed a strong gouvenment to make sure the system worked, stalin came in to power and it went down from there.

Incorrect, it went downhill starting from Lenin. Lenin set in place many of the principles and institutions behind the height of Stalinism. He's just 'lucky' enough to have died before what he started reached the 20million deaths mark and is thus treated as a hero by most reds.

[Minister Masket]

Ah bugger it.
Why don't we all go back to the good old days of the Monarchy, where we had one and only one person in charge, not a squabbling bunch of middle age lunatics dressing in penguin suits. Britian can have America back! Woohoo! Rule Britainnia, Britainnia rule the waves...etc

[Anarchist]

the problem is not all people hold those views. if all people were like that it would work easily, the problem is people are bastards. they will abuse their system at every opertunity. the same happens with comunism they needed a strong gouvenment to make sure the system worked, stalin came in to power and it went down from there.

To Minister- long Live Asoka!

That can be applied to everything, if Buddhist was the only world religion we would be celibrating a thousand years of relative peace.

Chewy, you have no evidence of that- its your capitalist biased showing through, Socialism is difficult to implement. Once its accepted it would benefit the human race, society based on renewable resources and equality instead of interests and currency. Free market would be an improvement over todays system, but would fail compared to Socialist societies(IMO)

[Minister Masket]

the problem is not all people hold those views. if all people were like that it would work easily, the problem is people are bastards. they will abuse their system at every opertunity. the same happens with comunism they needed a strong gouvenment to make sure the system worked, stalin came in to power and it went down from there.

To Minister- long Live Asoka!

Asoka? The Indian leader? What does he have to do with my rantings?

[Anarchist]

hes my one leader in charge.

A monarchy would be great with the right leader, unfortunately power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely

[Minister Masket]

hes my one leader in charge.

A monarchy would be great with the right leader, unfortunately power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely

A decent point, unless someone could control that power...