Anarchy? Really?

[TheLaofKazi]

No, humans are chaos and they bring chaos to the world. They attempt to create order from it and commonly fail.

Very true.

I don't agree with anarchy, because biologically we are still violent, chaotic humans.

But there is a social aspect of us that can be greatly changed. I think it's possible for us to achieve a healthy social state as a species, where less and less things need to be controlled by a government, and our culture becomes responsible, and we can get somewhat close to anarchy. Laws only exist because we need them too, and in many cases, when we don't need them and instead are exploited to control people. If we finally fixed the issues that lead to our many social problems, poverty, corruption, lack of education, ect., then maybe we wouldn't need many of the laws that keep us going today.

In other words, maybe if we didn't have so many shitty parents abusing their kids, maybe those people would be less likely to abuse others and be shitty parents, and then *ZOMG* we don't suck as much any more, and don't need nearly as many laws to keep society from plunging into chaos. I mean, a society where people wouldn't kill each other because "that's not nice" instead of "I could get caught" would be much better, and we wouldn't have to waste nearly as many resources trying to stop people from hurting each other, and then could focus on cooler things.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Humans are chaotic by default, making any attempt at a system based on order ultimately becoming a flawed failure of a system.

And I for one would rather live without any sort of system at all rather than under a failing one...

 

[Acier]

Two of my best friends are anarchists. Now there are different schools of anarchist thoughts, so there is hardly one giant blob on anarchists that think and behave the same way, I haven't asked my friends what they thought of the going ons in Canada, but I'm pretty they're embarrassed.

But from my association (I haven't read any literature and as I said, they are part of on school of thought)I'm guessing you're confusing anarchy as the word meaning total chaos, and an anarchist which is a political affiliation. My friends don't want chaos, they want the abolition of government and private property. They don't think it will happen in their lifetime, but from their viewpoint the goal of anarchy is to eliminate the need of government to protect you from each other, and go towards a altruistic society, Living on communes and sharing with everyone.

Their view of eliminating the government mainly consists of making it redundant, have the altruistic and protective acts done by the community rather than the government.


Note: I don't share their beliefs and this is what I know about it from knowing them for many years. I won't know too many details but if anyone has specific questions for them (since I'm not sure how many escapists are close to actual anarchists who are familiar with their "doctrine") I'll try to relay it to them.

 

[Chloe Berg]

I am an anarchist. Although I might not be the kind of anarchist you are familiar with. Let me explain my position, and see if it makes any sense to you. If any of my arguments or facts are wrong, feel free to criticize or correct.

I see it as a logical conclusion to rational principles. In a nutshell, here is the argument.

Principle: It is morally wrong for a human being to initiate violence against another human being, no matter their reasons or the number of people encouraging them. Note that I said ''initiate'' violence, which means self-defense is okay, since by definition you are not the one who initiated violence when defending yourself.

Fact #1: A government is, by definition, a group of individuals within a geographical area who have a monopoly on the initiation of violence.

Fact #2: Goverments are run entirely by human beings. (No brainer, really, but so many people put the governments, or rather the people who work for them, into some kind of different reality when it comes to moral questions)

Conclusion #1: Therefore, a government is simply another word for a group of human beings who initiate violence on the other human beings in their particular geographical area.

Conclusion #2: Governments are by their very definition immoral.

For those who might be interested in how a stateless society might organize itself, how conflicts between people could be resolved, how the re-emergence of a government could be prevented, how roads, education, health care, property protection and the like could be provided, and other concerns you might have (and I am sure most of them are perfectly valid), I invite you to take a look at this free book, entitled ''Practical Anarchy''.

http://freedomainradio.com/board/blogs/freedomain/archive/2008/11/14/practical-anarchy-the-book.aspx

 

[Acier]

Snip

Yikes, now I'm terrified my facts are wrong and you'll notice

 

[Chloe Berg]

Snip

Yikes, now I'm terrified my facts are wrong and you'll notice

Well, you haven't really argued anything except that 'anarchism isn't chaos', which I agree with. However, your friends are not the same kind of anarchists as I am. They think private property is immoral, which is not true in my opinion. On the contrary, I think private property rights ARE valid and one of the many moral rules governments violate (taxes being the most obvious example).

 

[Acier]

Snip

Yikes, now I'm terrified my facts are wrong and you'll notice

Well, you haven't really argued anything except that 'anarchism isn't chaos', which I agree with. And your friends are not the same kind of anarchists as I am. They think private property is immoral, which is not true in my opinion. on the contrary, I think private property rights ARE valid and one of the many moral rules governments violate (taxes being the most obvious example).

So would you believe in a truly capitalist economic system?

 

[Plurralbles]

I guess they think they're capable of scratching a life out of chaos but for the most part, humanity and many species look towards a leader or at least have a dominate individual who impregnates everything that moves or leads others across the dangerous world. Most anarchists would undoubtedly fail and die and get humped by some bum in a ditch somewhere. I prefer scientific progression and I have a hard time believing that humanity could still get it done without a government of some kind. I'm all for smaller governments though, including shrinking their jurisdictions.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Nature tends towards chaos. Young people are rebellious and dislike being told what to do. Human beings are rebellious and dislike being told what to do.

And yeah, there's the idea that if we eliminate all government and "this person is above you because I say so" laws, the world would be better off. Then again, humanity will always shape itself into some sort of government. You can't HAVE anarchy, because eventually certain anarchists will become more wealthy and powerful, and will create a government to protect their riches and power.

 

[Ungenericteen]

Anarchy must be used with the basic idea of Communism, meaning everyone does there part with equal footing, without a government the people have no one to envy and everyone is content.

 

[Marik2]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

 

[Blemontea]

its the aura surrounding the world if the world becomes to orderly it send telepathic messages to the weakest mind subject to grab there nearest tool of destruction till the status quo is restored. thats the spiritual reason... sorta. other than that "Some men, just want to see the world burn" B. Alfred: The Dark Knight.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

About 4 years ago, I played with the idea of anarchy. That did put me into the "under 14" category by two years, but I've never been one to just look at a picture of a forest fire and say "yep, that sounds pretty good" if you understand me. When I looked at it, one of my actual considerations was "is this just a bunch of people who want chaos". The answer that I quickly found was- no.

 

[Marik2]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

About 4 years ago, I played with the idea of anarchy. That did put me into the "under 14" category by two years, but I've never been one to just look at a picture of a forest fire and say "yep, that sounds pretty good" if you understand me. When I looked at it, one of my actual considerations was "is this just a bunch of people who want chaos". The answer that I quickly found was- no.

Yup people always assume "Oh anarchists want pure chaos" without doing actual research. Anarchy is that with no government not chaos.

This is where I got the real concept of anarchy from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_%28Thoreau%29

 

[Zyxzy]

Bah, anarchy. It can'r organize large-scale relief efforts or space colonization.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

About 4 years ago, I played with the idea of anarchy. That did put me into the "under 14" category by two years, but I've never been one to just look at a picture of a forest fire and say "yep, that sounds pretty good" if you understand me. When I looked at it, one of my actual considerations was "is this just a bunch of people who want chaos". The answer that I quickly found was- no.

Yup people always assume "Oh anarchists want pure chaos" without doing actual research. Anarchy is that with no government not chaos.

This is where I got the real concept of anarchy from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_%28Thoreau%29

I didn't ever read Thoreau while I was interested in anarchy. Funnily enough, now that I'm a Socialist, he is one of my favorite philosophers to read. His political theories actually provide me with a lot of considerations on how any political system should be implemented, and tend to turn me away from the idea of the violent people's revolution in favor of a peaceable one (particularly the work you linked to). I don't agree with him almost at all economically obviously, but I very much agree with his anti-consumerist views as well as his anti-nationalist and anti-authoritarian viewpoints.

I guess, purely ideologically, I still have quite a lot of anarchistic sympathies (particularly the idea of stateless Communism), I just don't see it working in this world..

 

[Marik2]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

About 4 years ago, I played with the idea of anarchy. That did put me into the "under 14" category by two years, but I've never been one to just look at a picture of a forest fire and say "yep, that sounds pretty good" if you understand me. When I looked at it, one of my actual considerations was "is this just a bunch of people who want chaos". The answer that I quickly found was- no.

Yup people always assume "Oh anarchists want pure chaos" without doing actual research. Anarchy is that with no government not chaos.

This is where I got the real concept of anarchy from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_%28Thoreau%29

I didn't ever read Thoreau while I was interested in anarchy. Funnily enough, now that I'm a Socialist, he is one of my favorite philosophers to read. His political theories actually provide me with a lot of considerations on how any political system should be implemented, and tend to turn me away from the idea of the violent people's revolution in favor of a peaceable one (particularly the work you linked to). I don't agree with him almost at all economically obviously, but I very much agree with his anti-consumerist views as well as his anti-nationalist and anti-authoritarian viewpoints.

I guess, purely ideologically, I still have quite a lot of anarchistic sympathies (particularly the idea of stateless Communism), I just don't see it working in this world..

Yeah hes my favorite as well, his essay of Civil Disobedience changed my views on everything.

And yeah it makes me sad that our current world will never let those ideas go through. -_-

 

[Chloe Berg]

So would you believe in a truly capitalist economic system?

I don't like the term 'capitalist' because it is so often associated with the current system, which is in my opinion closer to corporate fascism. Rich people and corporations are basically exempt from all responsibility because of how the legal system works. Which is of course because corporations put so much money into each political party, legally or not.

But if you mean capitalism as in free market, then yes, I am what you can call an anarcho-capitalist.

I would like to quickly address an argument that has been made a lot in this topic. Although I may be an anarchist, I am not an utopian. In any society, including an anarchistic one, there will be theft, rape and murder. Of course people can be selfish, chaotic, destructive, stupid, evil, [insert bad quality here]. To me, this is one of the main reasons why we CAN'T have a government. because you know that all those bad people will be attracted to it. Governments are the safest place to do every evil act known to man. Violence ? Enter the police force. You'll never get arrested for police brutality. Theft ? Look at the current tax rate. Rape ? Spend a week in prison and see. Murder? Join the army, you'll be able to murder Iraqis, Afghans and be hailed as a hero when you return home. Trust me, evil people are way, WAY more dangerous in the government than they could ever be in a free society.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

About 4 years ago, I played with the idea of anarchy. That did put me into the "under 14" category by two years, but I've never been one to just look at a picture of a forest fire and say "yep, that sounds pretty good" if you understand me. When I looked at it, one of my actual considerations was "is this just a bunch of people who want chaos". The answer that I quickly found was- no.

Yup people always assume "Oh anarchists want pure chaos" without doing actual research. Anarchy is that with no government not chaos.

This is where I got the real concept of anarchy from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_%28Thoreau%29

I didn't ever read Thoreau while I was interested in anarchy. Funnily enough, now that I'm a Socialist, he is one of my favorite philosophers to read. His political theories actually provide me with a lot of considerations on how any political system should be implemented, and tend to turn me away from the idea of the violent people's revolution in favor of a peaceable one (particularly the work you linked to). I don't agree with him almost at all economically obviously, but I very much agree with his anti-consumerist views as well as his anti-nationalist and anti-authoritarian viewpoints.

I guess, purely ideologically, I still have quite a lot of anarchistic sympathies (particularly the idea of stateless Communism), I just don't see it working in this world..

Yeah hes my favorite as well, his essay of Civil Disobedience changed my views on everything.

And yeah it makes me sad that our current world will never let those ideas go through. -_-

I actually have some hope for the idea of the Socialist progression where, if the world were entirely Socialist for long enough, stateless Communism would be viable. I have some hope for it, but I'm not even sold on that working.

In the meantime, I suppose I'll just keep trying to educate people in my little section of Texas that Socialism is not related to Fascism and work from there.

 

[Marik2]

What most people unaffiliated with the ideology, and middle schoolers and high school freshmen wearing circle As think anarchy is- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

What Anarchism is not- the belief that there should be absolute chaos.

No self respecting Anarchist over maybe fourteen thinks that chaos is a goal. They tend to think that if governments are eliminated, people will assemble themselves willingly into an ordered society free of oppression. This is the significance of the circle A. The "circle" is supposed to be the letter O. The A inside of it stands for: "Anarchy is order".

Do I agree with their belief? No. However, it isn't chaos they want.

Finally someone who knows what Anarchy is.

About 4 years ago, I played with the idea of anarchy. That did put me into the "under 14" category by two years, but I've never been one to just look at a picture of a forest fire and say "yep, that sounds pretty good" if you understand me. When I looked at it, one of my actual considerations was "is this just a bunch of people who want chaos". The answer that I quickly found was- no.

Yup people always assume "Oh anarchists want pure chaos" without doing actual research. Anarchy is that with no government not chaos.

This is where I got the real concept of anarchy from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_%28Thoreau%29

I didn't ever read Thoreau while I was interested in anarchy. Funnily enough, now that I'm a Socialist, he is one of my favorite philosophers to read. His political theories actually provide me with a lot of considerations on how any political system should be implemented, and tend to turn me away from the idea of the violent people's revolution in favor of a peaceable one (particularly the work you linked to). I don't agree with him almost at all economically obviously, but I very much agree with his anti-consumerist views as well as his anti-nationalist and anti-authoritarian viewpoints.

I guess, purely ideologically, I still have quite a lot of anarchistic sympathies (particularly the idea of stateless Communism), I just don't see it working in this world..

Yeah hes my favorite as well, his essay of Civil Disobedience changed my views on everything.

And yeah it makes me sad that our current world will never let those ideas go through. -_-

I actually have some hope for the idea of the Socialist progression where, if the world were entirely Socialist for long enough, stateless Communism would be viable. I have some hope for it, but I'm not even sold on that working.

In the meantime, I suppose I'll just keep trying to educate people in my little section of Texas that Socialism is not related to Fascism and work from there.

Good luck on convincing people in Texas that socialism isnt evil

And as a Texan I should know since we are a bit stubborn.