WTF is with anarchy?

Kids with anarchy patches aren't the ones that are going to be making the radical changes. They don't know anything about politics, they are just trying to be rebellious and different.

Like I said before, there are plenty of intelligent, rational people that are working towards making a radical change in the way countries/the world is run. Will a revolution happen? Will the world change? Who knows.

You need to clarify this. What do you mean 'evolve'. Evolve into what? I think that most humans are completely capable of radically changing the government. Take a look at the 1936 spanish revolution. There many many small anarchist communities during the revolution. They worked, the people were happy and free. The majority of the working class had anarchist ideals. Yes, they lost the revolution, but they proved that anarchy can work...to a point.

 

I am not an anarchist but i think that it is a beautiful idea. No man telling you what to do, absolute freedom. Without government and religon then there probably will be no more wars. The only problem is that the immaturity of people are holding us back from it. Anarchy to me is more of a dream in a Utopian Society than a reality, which is why I don't believe in it. If there was a way to make it work though, then I think it would be the way to go man!
-peace

 

Well said, my friend, this is how I feel too. Thanks for putting it in such understandable terms.

 

She said what I did, but in a different way.

 

For all you people who are afraid that Anarchy will result in mass chaos and violence are only looking at a fraction of the whole picture, the only part you want to see.

Just because there is no government doesn't mean there arn't necessarily any cops protecting us, or taxation to support those cops or whatever. People pay taxes only because they know that if they don't, there are consequences. No one does it to benefit the community, they do it for themselves. Same with protection and law enforcement.
A guy kills another guy in the street. 9/10 times no one bothers chasing the guy down either because their afraid for their own life or because they think the cops will.
In an anarchistic state, it's your duty to protect the guy next to you just as it is his. It's your duty to support the community just as it is the community's duty to support you.

 

But what's to keep you from neglecting that duty?

 

I actually find it kinda funny that all these self-professed "scholars" of anarchism think they have the proper knowledge of an extremely indepth philosophy such as anarchism (popularly called "anarchy") because of observing teenagers with patches and bad attitudes walking around calling themselves anarchists, who themselves know almost nothing about the philosophy.
If you want info on what anarchism really is, and have a truly objective mind (not the annoyingly arrogant kind) check out www.infoshop.org and its many links.

 

Basic Human Kindness. I know that doesn't sound very realistic but that's probably because you don't see a whole lot of it nowadays in the U.S.
But imagine Anarchy in a country like France that is already very socialist. I know it is unlikely to happen any time soon but it would probably work more successfuly there then in america.

 

Hey I hope your comments weren't directed towards me brother, because I did make a comment about the kids with patches. That's all. Take it for what it is. Never claimed to be a doctor of political science with a concentration in anarchism. Most people who "support" anarchy don't know shit about it; just giving my take on it. Sort of like the kids buying che shirts and giving their money to the opposite side of what the guy on the shirt stands for.

 

No, I wasn't directing my comments at you. I was talking generally about ignorant people claiming to know something about a topic they in fact know nothing about. But your one statement "Most people who "support" anarchy don't know shit about it" is highly questionable. What exactly do you mean by "most"? Are you talking about dumb highschool kids, or the Anarchist movement that emerged in North America after the WTO protests in Seattle? I can assure you that those involved in the anarchist MOVEMENT know a great deal about the philosophy they espouse. There are several factions within the anarchist movement as well.

 

Anarchy is a very flexible philosophy. One anarchist's vision may be entirely different from another's and yet they will both fight for the same thing: 'Abolition of the State'. What is disputed among anarchists is of the society that will emerge after the state is gone.

 

True, but there is little agreement of the actual revolution. I, for example, do not believe in violence. I do not think an armed revolution is the best choice, but I think I could consider supporting a peaceful revolution. I am still borderline about whether to call destruction of property violence or not, but I am leaning towards the latter.

 

I should have quoted "support." I am basically saying that 'most' people i have encountered in my life, are dumbasses who 'support' things they don't know shit about by doing things like put patches on their backpacks and listening to punk rock. So by support, I am really saying pseudo-support I guess.


Someone asked what I meant by radical change of government can't happen til humans evolve more... I think people will eventually evolve to be more selfless, to lose greed, etc. and a lot of things about society could change, including government, once we evolve. Just my 'theory.' Feel free to bash.

 

I agree that peaceful revolutions are the way to win over more people and make bigger changes. But it won't be like picking daisies either. I'm sure if a revolution is ever to take place, the only thing the media will talk about is the threat of armed conflict. They'll create fictitious dangers that will eventually become real if we don't give ourselves a good image sooner.

I think the reason most anarchists have resorted to violence in the past to spread their word is because they felt too underpowered to affect people any other way. Thankfully now we have the internet to help spread ideas and bring people in contact with each other (like this site) so hopfully the next revolution won't be sparked by a bomb or assasination.

 

This thread is a gigantic example of people who before they even bother to find out more about what anarchism is really about cast stones because they can't bear the thought of human beings living without an authoritarian government.

I don't know know a huge deal about anarchism, but I agree with the basic arguments of why it would benefit people.

Everyone consider a few things, with an open mind:

Human nature can cover a whole spectrum of behaviour, good, bad, apathetic, kind, greedy etc. Some of the early anarchists argued some of these points:

Before the advent of civilisation, several, but not all, tribal cultures managed to live incredibly harmonious lives based simply on the idea of family. They did not require a mass authoritarian government, yet they managed to nurture there children greater than any slavish working parent could do today, they cared for the sick, the elderly and disabled with much time and shared responsibility. They were not forced to work 8-9 hours a day to support themselves. And perhaps the greatest insight into tribal cultures is that often when a westerner meets, for example a highly traditional Australian Aboriginal who continues to live off of the land, they are touched with a kindness and warmth which they don't experience at home. I can go on but i'm tired.

Another idea of anarchism is based on revisions of darwin's evolutionary theory. Biologists found in the early 20th century that perhaps one of the greatest benefits to any species in natural selection is the ability to work together. Humans are the superior animal on earth because we are intrinsically social and given the right circumstances we know that being kind will benefit our happiness and survival.

So going on from that, I, like most people here have the idea that people are greedy and cruel fucks which of course is very true. However, think about our jobs and our capatalist society, who are the people which get further, kind people? Sometimes. But the easiest way to be successful is to have no backbone, to be ruthless and greedy and to consider people as obstacles or economic commodoties other than people deserving of our kindness. Our culture facilitates the worst parts of human nature.

I hope that made sense, I'm a little stoned and very tired so i'll come back another day. The cynical idea that people are petty dumb idiots incapable of caring for themselves is the main cause of apathy and the idea that we can't live without our greedy corrupt governments.

I don't care about racist anarchists or pseudo-teen anarchists, like some people have mentioned, like noam chomsky, there are smart, logical, optimistic anarchists,

 

YES perfect sense in many ways, and parts even coincided with my beliefs about evolution and governmental change, but you explained it better. It is pro-evolution for us to work together, things like greed, jealousy, and selfish people stop that however. Soon enough, maybe those things will disappear and we can actually all work together. Sort of a 'dream' I guess, probably will materialize but not in this life.

 

Cool, I'm glad someone can see the sense in unconventional beliefs.

I completely agree with the idea that a revolution is something that will take time and will only happen after the human race advances more. People often associate all types of socialism with rapid and violent revolutions, which is often what gives anarchism a bad rap.

I propose its something that happens very slowly, from the bottom up. That is, people form communities or groups that are anarchistic in nature, but still working within the parameters of the law, without contributing to the machine (if you understand what i mean in making that distinction), for example, communes, tribes, nomadic groups, communities - with creativity and ingenuity that list can go on and on. As people become more and more disillusioned with the increasingly chaotic and power fuelled capitalist society (look at the hippy and punk revolutions, there is bound to be more), more and more of them will join the anarchists - or simply alternative living types, and eventually the government will lose power.

This is probably too optimistic. I don't know, but my aim is to one day de-segregate myself from mass society, and find a way of living that suits me. Maybe live on a island or join a commune or something, and perhaps people will follow. Peaceful revolution by example. That is what anarchism means to me, and as far as I see its a valid idea. In my opinion, the title of this thread should be WTF is with anti-anarchism.

Another note, I also think the best sort of transition government on the road to anarchism would be democratic socialism. Essentially i'm not too fussed, what matters is that we find ways to live the way we want to without shitting on anyone else.

 

I agree about forming seperate anarchist communes and communities but I doubt that everyone in America will have this notion. The government will always find ways to keep people 'in' and no matter how many individuals manage to free themselves, the beat still goes on. Peaceful revolution is definitly the way to go but we also need to spread positive propaganda if we ever want to get across to the majority of Americans.

 

And that is Truth.

 

Yeah man... people shooting each other, getting away with murder and theft and rape... feels good man.