First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Anarchism
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/10

Allhailodin wrote:


orangeflute wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


orangeflute wrote:

So you do admit that you are wrong on the issues of 'Leftists are of the most violent sort'.


What about the leftists who were saying "Kill bush" && "Bush is a disease the cure is death" and all that stuff.

Plus communists are leftists and they just sabotaged some train tracks in India derailed a train and killed a 100+ people.

Google Naxalites && Communist Party of India && Maoism) So leftist can be just as violent.


And rightist Pinochet murdered millions, and the Right wing death squads of South America are not the most agreeable to our consitutions. My point is that not all leftist are violent bastards as Miss Tarakelly makes them to be, and that rightist are not peaceful either.



Augusto Pinochet ? Of Chile ?

He only killed somewhere around 1,000 - 3000 people.

And not all rightist are monarchs.


I stand corrected, but still a considerable number. In addition, there have been many, many rightist dictators (not monarchs) who have summarily executed all opposition. But, not all leftist are Marxist, and not all Marxist approve of genocide. There you go.
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/10
I will take leave because this is divertory toward the original intention of this thread, and thus, any further comment concerning this foray will be duly ignored.
1078 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Shinagawa
Offline
Posted 3/19/12
Anarchy is the only righteous way of life. Nature's law is "strongest survives" and all other laws were made by mankind. Why should we take orders from them? Just because they have "president" or "officer" in front of their names? They are only homo sapiens just like us, so we really have no reason to obey them. Because we would fall into chaos otherwise? Remember that "chaos" is a word born out of "Order". They are both made-up, once again by humans like us. Words like those are lies to keep us obedient. There is no such thing as chaos, just the nature and the way it is. Cold but beautiful!
380 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 3/19/12
There's nothing more hilarious and annoying than an anarchist. Unrealistic expectations. = w =
6268 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
Posted 3/20/12
I see anarchism as a very valuable ideology.
It's the complete freedom of humanity, but I do not it as a feasable option in the near future.
I fear anarchism is a concept that would create too much conflict, by greed, religion or any other differences we have.

I think it might be the next best thing after democracy, but it will take a long time to be actually of use.
5137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAA...
Offline
Posted 11/16/12
anarchy is as much as political theory as bald being a hair color,it is a oxymoron
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 11/16/12
Anarchists are stupid.
Either that, or they just don't give a shit.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 11/16/12 , edited 11/16/12

Big_A wrote:
Anarchy is the only righteous way of life. Nature's law is "strongest survives"...

Except that we humans have evolved to the point where we don't need nature's laws anymore. We trancended that shit long ago.
Why should we go back to that primitive state when we can be so much more?


Big_A wrote:
Why should we take orders from them? Just because they have "president" or "officer" in front of their names?

Maybe because we as a community chose them to be our leaders?


Big_A wrote:
They are only homo sapiens just like us, so we really have no reason to obey them.

Except from the fact that we, you know, elected them to lead us. As a community.


Big_A wrote:
Because we would fall into chaos otherwise? Remember that "chaos" is a word born out of "Order". They are both made-up, once again by humans like us.

"Gravity" is a word made up by humans too. That doesn't change anything. It's is still there regardless.


Big_A wrote:
Words like those are lies to keep us obedient. There is no such thing as chaos, just the nature and the way it is. Cold but beautiful!

You're an idiot.
2106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Guess
Offline
Posted 11/16/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:

Except that we humans have evolved to the point where we don't need nature's laws anymore. We trancended that shit long ago.
Why should we go back to that primitive state when we can be so much more?


Quite wrong there, Darwinian Evolution still applies to us in the sense that we still produce random mutation, and these random mutation may offer us with certain qualities that would help up adapt to our enviorment- it is a mistake to think that, because of our technology, we are completely free of it, when, in truth, our technology only slows this process down by creating a condition in which we do not need to adapt as much. So, we have not actually transcended the Natural Selection, we have only slightly hindered it by creating the conditions in which man, as he is, does not need to adapt as much to survive.


Maybe because we as a community chose them to be our leaders?


Presidents, and other people, do not have any authority to rule our us, simply because a majority of us have given our consent to be ruled by them. There is nothing that inherently qualifies them to be our masters, there is nothing in their education that says that they are wise enough to rule over us, but, at the same time, acknowledging that we are wise enough to choose them. All government and government employees must offer ample justification their intrusion and their abridgement of our liberty, or, indeed, perform any action- If a president wants to throw me in gaol, he must, first, prove that it is indeed justifiable for him to do so.

Thus, just because a community chose him to lead, he must justify his leading before we can accept it.


Except from the fact that we, you know, elected them to lead us. As a community.


Legitimacy is not enough for leadership- if a person is legitimately enthroned, he must still justify why he must act in so and so way. Just because the community choose him, does not mean we must blindly accept his leadership.

Man is in Liberty when he can do whatever he desires- unhindered- so long as he does not impede another man's liberty to do as he desires. The government only has has any form of legitimacy when the liberty of its people are threatened- and, even then, it has no legitimacy to impede on the liberty of its own people, or the people of other nations. I think Anarchism is a realisation of this truth, but with the belief that Man is, or may one day be, be wise enough to live in Liberty without government.



"Gravity" is a word made up by humans too. That doesn't change anything. It's is still there regardless.


Anarchy is not chaos.



3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 11/17/12 , edited 11/17/12

longfenglim wrote:

Quite wrong there, Darwinian Evolution still applies to us in the sense that we still produce random mutation, and these random mutation may offer us with certain qualities that would help up adapt to our enviorment- it is a mistake to think that, because of our technology, we are completely free of it, when, in truth, our technology only slows this process down by creating a condition in which we do not need to adapt as much. So, we have not actually transcended the Natural Selection, we have only slightly hindered it by creating the conditions in which man, as he is, does not need to adapt as much to survive.


Obviously it's still there, because it's how things are.
But the point is that it doesn't have much of an affect on us. It doesn't apply to us in the same way, and it's not a concept that rules our existence, seeing as now, even the unfit are able to live.



longfenglim wrote:

Presidents, and other people, do not have any authority to rule our us, simply because a majority of us have given our consent to be ruled by them. There is nothing that inherently qualifies them to be our masters, there is nothing in their education that says that they are wise enough to rule over us, but, at the same time, acknowledging that we are wise enough to choose them. All government and government employees must offer ample justification their intrusion and their abridgement of our liberty, or, indeed, perform any action- If a president wants to throw me in gaol, he must, first, prove that it is indeed justifiable for him to do so.

Thus, just because a community chose him to lead, he must justify his leading before we can accept it.
Legitimacy is not enough for leadership- if a person is legitimately enthroned, he must still justify why he must act in so and so way. Just because the community choose him, does not mean we must blindly accept his leadership.


I thought that went without saying. Doesn't it?
Has history ever implied otherwise?


longfenglim wrote:
Anarchy is not chaos.


Not in itself, seeing as it reigns in the wild nature and works there.
But mankind is different.
As you said: "Man is in Liberty when he can do whatever he desires- unhindered- so long as he does not impede another man's liberty to do as he desires."
But the problem is that that is exactly what would happen. Which is why mankind is not fit for absolute liberty.


longfenglim wrote:
The government only has has any form of legitimacy when the liberty of its people are threatened- and, even then, it has no legitimacy to impede on the liberty of its own people...

Not really, but we have still made it so that it does. Because it's for the good of the general public.


longfenglim wrote:
I think Anarchism is a realisation of this truth, but with the belief that Man is, or may one day be, be wise enough to live in Liberty without
government.

Yeah well I don't. Mankind is stupid, selfish and evil.
I have no faith what so ever in that such a future will ever exist.
And not only because of that, but also because humans are pack animals. We formed societies for a reason. Because we function better and advance faster as a community than we do alone.

Not to mention it makes us better equipped to face danger. Strength in numbers and all.
There is literally no reason NOT to form societies, other than childish illusions of absolute freedom and liberty, which in the end would do nothing but harm us.
1078 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Shinagawa
Offline
Posted 11/17/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Big_A wrote:
Anarchy is the only righteous way of life. Nature's law is "strongest survives"...

Except that we humans have evolved to the point where we don't need nature's laws anymore. We trancended that shit long ago.
Why should we go back to that primitive state when we can be so much more?


Big_A wrote:
Why should we take orders from them? Just because they have "president" or "officer" in front of their names?

Maybe because we as a community chose them to be our leaders?


Big_A wrote:
They are only homo sapiens just like us, so we really have no reason to obey them.

Except from the fact that we, you know, elected them to lead us. As a community.


Big_A wrote:
Because we would fall into chaos otherwise? Remember that "chaos" is a word born out of "Order". They are both made-up, once again by humans like us.

"Gravity" is a word made up by humans too. That doesn't change anything. It's is still there regardless.


Big_A wrote:
Words like those are lies to keep us obedient. There is no such thing as chaos, just the nature and the way it is. Cold but beautiful!

You're an idiot.


Oh boy, forgot that I wrote this a long time ago. I come home and see someone writing that I am an idiot. You know, chaos and order aren't really as clear as gravity. Gravity has always existed, we just made up a word for it. I however, believe that chaos and order aren't as solid as the concept "gravity".

For example, what is and what isn't chaos could be a matter of opinion. That's why I know there is no such thing as chaos and order, only life and the way it is. In my opinion. What is and isn't gravity is just black or white, there is no gray area.

We choose our leader? Why do you use the word "we"? Are we on the same team? Or how about this... Did I choose to be in a community? No I didn't, but all land is owned by some sort of government so I can't live on my own. Anarchism is ofcourse not possible at this point, but I am more of an anarchist at heart, not mind. But I believe that if we never entered this way of life where money makes the world spin, bad people wouldn't exist. I believe that all bad men, became bad because we live in a system that values greed more than empathy. We can't go back now, but if we managed to live without some sort of leader/leaders for just a few hundered years, I believe anarchism could work. And the so called "Utopy" would be possible.

I'm not an idiot, I just have a different opinion than you. Though I have to report that you called me one. I admit that I feel a bit insulted. It was immature and uncalled for it.
81324 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M
Offline
Posted 11/17/12
There is no system of government or non-government that humans can establish that will result in everyone being peaceful and civil with each other. An anarchistic society will always result in chaos or a new government formed, just as a socialist society will always result in tyranny or collapse. Humans are not "pack animals", nor are they entirely individualistic. There is a reason that there has never been a point in history that a society has remained anarchistic for any meaningful period of time without devolving into chaos. An anarchistic society will have thieves and murderers causing havoc, power hungry groups/individuals trying to force their will on others, and the greedy hording resources. At the point that people gather together (or enough have fallen under the power hungry group/individual's sway), there will be laws formed to combat these elements, which will be the formation of a government.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 11/17/12

Big_A wrote:
I'm not an idiot, I just have a different opinion than you. Though I have to report that you called me one. I admit that I feel a bit insulted. It was immature and uncalled for it.


You're right. That was uncalled for.
I was in a really bad mood when I wrote it, but I should've been more conciderate regardless.
I am deeply sorry for insulting you.


Big_A wrote:
We choose our leader? Why do you use the word "we"? Are we on the same team? Or how about this... Did I choose to be in a community? No I didn't, but all land is owned by some sort of government so I can't live on my own.

I said "we" as in that we are all a part of a community, as you probably realized.
As for you choosing to belong to a community... well, no. You didn't, but there's always some place not owned by anyone out in the wilderness.
If not in your country, then there will at least be SOMEWHERE in the world where you could live in solitude if you so desired.


Big_A wrote:

Anarchism is ofcourse not possible at this point, but I am more of an anarchist at heart, not mind. But I believe that if we never entered this way of life where money makes the world spin, bad people wouldn't exist. I believe that all bad men, became bad because we live in a system that values greed more than empathy. We can't go back now, but if we managed to live without some sort of leader/leaders for just a few hundered years, I believe anarchism could work. And the so called "Utopy" would be possible.


The idea that man wouldn't be evil if we didn't live in a society ruled by money is something I find highly unlikely.
Even in nature, it is not uncommon for primates to mercilessly kill each other, simply out of pure hatered. This was also the case for humans way back in the ages, before we formed societies and only lived in simple packs.
And even in those primitive times, they still found something to be greedy and unsympathetic over.

Mankind is selfish by nature and also spiteful, and I believe that it's society that keeps us in line, and prevents us from being savages.
1078 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Shinagawa
Offline
Posted 11/17/12 , edited 11/17/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Big_A wrote:
I'm not an idiot, I just have a different opinion than you. Though I have to report that you called me one. I admit that I feel a bit insulted. It was immature and uncalled for it.


You're right. That was uncalled for.
I was in a really bad mood when I wrote it, but I should've been more conciderate regardless.
I am deeply sorry for insulting you.


Big_A wrote:
We choose our leader? Why do you use the word "we"? Are we on the same team? Or how about this... Did I choose to be in a community? No I didn't, but all land is owned by some sort of government so I can't live on my own.

I said "we" as in that we are all a part of a community, as you probably realized.
As for you choosing to belong to a community... well, no. You didn't, but there's always some place not owned by anyone out in the wilderness.
If not in your country, then there will at least be SOMEWHERE in the world where you could live in solitude if you so desired.


Big_A wrote:

Anarchism is ofcourse not possible at this point, but I am more of an anarchist at heart, not mind. But I believe that if we never entered this way of life where money makes the world spin, bad people wouldn't exist. I believe that all bad men, became bad because we live in a system that values greed more than empathy. We can't go back now, but if we managed to live without some sort of leader/leaders for just a few hundered years, I believe anarchism could work. And the so called "Utopy" would be possible.


The idea that man wouldn't be evil if we didn't live in a society ruled by money is something I find highly unlikely.
Even in nature, it is not uncommon for primates to mercilessly kill each other, simply out of pure hatered. This was also the case for humans way back in the ages, before we formed societies and only lived in simple packs.
And even in those primitive times, they still found something to be greedy and unsympathetic over.

Mankind is selfish by nature and also spiteful, and I believe that it's society that keeps us in line, and prevents us from being savages.


I agree. We have been savages through-out history. The strange thing is that even with all these laws, we still are. My point is, I think we have reached a stage in evolution where we would no longer be like that in a world of Anarchism. I think what keeps us this way is the system with all it's flaws.

But I know what you mean, and I hate to face the truth that the world would never be able to be like that. There is always people hungering for nothing but power, then again I still think it's because of our way of life. It would take the world at least 200 years to get into something as wide as anarchism and mankind doesn't have that patience. It's too late... I can still only be "Anarchist at heart" not mind.

I know that anarchism would be perfect if only people gave it time.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 11/17/12 , edited 11/17/12
CURSE YOU, CRUNCHYROLL FOR PUTTING THE QUOTE BUTTON SO CLOSE TO THE EDIT BUTTON!!!
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.