Anarchy: Official Definition

an·ar·chy

ˈanərkē/

noun

1. Whining complaining upper middle class white kids who will give up and quit at the first sign of trouble.

2. A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
"he must ensure public order in a country threatened with upper middle class white kids who will run away if confronted"

3. Absence of government and absolute freedom of the upper middle class white kid, regarded as a political ideal.

synonyms: lawlessness, nihilism, mobocracy, revolution, insurrection, disorder, chaos, mayhem, tumult, turmoil

"conditions are dangerously ripe for anarchy"

 

Considering much of this is contrary to well documented facts, what's your source?

 

He made it up...

 

The official definition for anarchy is call it whatever you want motherfuckers. I'm a Taoist and I've had to explain to people repeatedly that if they make it illegal to call ourselves Taoists we will simply invent another stupid name. Only fucking lawyers split semantic hairs and demand everyone use their words. The common dictionary is as common as dirt, merely containing popular definitions listed in their order of how commonly they are used, yet over half of Americans insist on debating the definition of stupid and who is the best example, because they all think they are fucking lawyers.

 

Trotskyists?

 

Marx's problem was he had a stunted sense of humor, and had no clue how to raise a healthy flock of chickens. Tribals have said since the dawn of agriculture that civilized people need to learn how to raise chickens, but nobody ever listens to anarchists and primitives. You are either smarter than the damned chicken, or you are the fucking chicken. Either you have personal integrity, or you are working for the man and a member of an exclusive club none of my friends care to join, and definitely not a citizen of the world.

 

I apologize for insulting all the upper middle class white kids out there.

However ...... Be honest ...... Have you EVER met an "anarchist" who was NOT an upper middle class white kid?

 

One of my best friends was raised in a tar shack with his 22 siblings by his single mother. Another was born in one barn and raised in another. Did it not occur to you that such people have no love or interest whatsoever in governments? If you only hang out with the cool kids, that's all you know.

 

Yes. I've met anarchists that are working class white kids.

 

Yes actually I think all anarchists I know were raised dirt poor. And probably about half of them aren't white. Many have experienced how destructive this society is first hand. Seeing their families broken enough to beat and rape, overdose.
It would actually be far easier for the poor and non-white to percieve the horrors of the state and capitalism/colonization than the more privileged.
Doesn't take much to see that there have been beautiful anarchic societies in the past, are many in the present and for the sake of this species, hopefully many in the future.

 

i don't know if i've actually met an anarchist in real life. i actually haven't met that many upper middle class kids either; i tend to gravitate toward the poor folks.

i remember when i used to do deliveries at a pizza place in the city. i worked the day shift, but most of my coworkers who worked nights were robbed at gunpoint at some point or another, and every time it was by a black guy. even so, i would not say that the official definition of an armed robber is "a black guy."

 

I'm a goddamned motherfucking Taoist too god damn it.

 

When the Christian missionaries first started working in China in earnest over a century ago they were frequently shocked to discover their best converts attending a Buddhist or Taoist temple or whatever and would confront them. The converts would swear they were good Christians and had been saved by Jesus, but on Tuesdays they were Taoists and on Wednesdays Buddhists, and so on. Fucking Taoists have more fun, I assume.

 

I think it's that Christianity has never offered something like a mental status someone could assume. Do unto others is great, but how can you feel decent yourself? Christianity has never really answered that question, not like Taoism and Buddhism do. Does that make them selfish religions?

Or am I completely off base and Christianity is really saying that the only way to feel good about yourself is to help other people?

 

Yeh, I think you were off base. Christianity is really saying that the only way to feel good about yourself is to love God and other people. Getting back to topic, if the OP could name some anarchists who fit his definition, maybe we could take it from there.

 

i assume it's some random white kids he knows, so if he were to name them the names would probably be meaningless to the rest of us.

 

So he's basing all the hundreds of years worth of this global ideology on some white kids he knows?

 

that's how i'm interpreting his post.

 

Some anarchists, called "Social Anarchists", get around this by redefining anarchism as a highly decentralized political system based on consensus. (e.g., Murray Bookchin and associates at the Institute for Social Ecology: Janet Biehl, Cindy Minstein, Dan Chodorkoff call for municipal libertarianism.). The Rainbow Family of the Living Light draws on Native American traditions for its anarchist traditions. I've attended some of the Rainbow gatherings. Theoretically, the main decision making body is the Council, consisting of whoever shows up at a given time and operating on the basis of consensus. In practice, decisions are made by "focalizers"--volunteers who take charge to get things done, and typically have their own councils, to carry out specialized functions like operating kitchens, directing traffic and policing bus village, digging latrines, or staffing the infirmary. One of these focalizer subgroups, which tends to be first among equals, is the Shanti Sena Family, the volunteers who act as security for the gathering, handling disturbances as they see fit. They have their own councils to coordinate their efforts. Far from being "Whining, complaining middle class white kids", the Shanti Sena tend to be hardened Road Dogs, veterans who're had difficulty readjusting to civilian society, and old hippie refugees from the Haight. They tend to be from working class backgrounds and without college educations. Theoretically, everybody is Shanti Sena, but in practice, it's the same informal group who handle the function from year to year and deal with the federal authorities. There are also the Elders, experienced Rainbows who command personal authority by virtue of their experience and charisma. But who these are is somewhat subjective. One person's elder may be another person's nobody. As for rules, there is a saying "the only rule is there are no rules"; but that's misleading, because there are more informal norms than you can shake a stick at and they are enforced by informal social pressure. It may sound a bit chaotic, but it's been remarkably effective in coordinating up to 20,000 people non-violently for forty-six years, so that now their ways of doing things qualify as hippie institutions. Of course, the main thing we do is gather periodically, so it's not like running a state or local government.

There have been some relatively effective efforts at running actual societies according to anarchist principles. https://listverse.com/2016/06/29/10-instances-of-anarchist-societies-that-actually-worked/ An Anarchist FAQ – A.5 What are some examples of “Anarchy in Action”? Most of these have not endured, either because of hostile action from hierachical states or internal dissension. Hunter-gatherer societies are typically "acephalous"--esentially anarchistic. Historically, he Dinka and Nuer of Southern Sudan, the Igbo of eastern Nigeria and some of the plains Indian tribes, like the Blackfoot, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Crow, Pawnee, etc., would meet that description, rules being enforced by men's societies as the occasion demanded.
There are also modern-day anarchists, whom Bookchin charcterizes as "lifestyle anarchists" or "Post Left: or individualist anarchits, such as Hakim Bey and Bob Black.. These folks, in the tradition of the nineteenth century egoist Max Stirner, simply refuse to submit to rules, authority or hierarchy. Often lumped together with these are the primitivist anarchsit like John Zerzan and David Watson, who think society went wrong when it abandoned hunting and gathering for agriculture. I think Antifa draws mainly from this militant Post-left faction of anarchists, particularly the ones based in Eugene, Portland and Seattle, as well as from Marxists like Yvette
Felarca's BAMN.

For an explanation and defense of anarchy, see https://anarchyinaction.or/index.php?title=Anarchy_Works
Personally, I'm skeptical about its feasibility for large-scale societies.