Yes, they are rulers. But only in the workplace and only with the employee's consent. As such, capitalism is fully compatible with anarchism.
Advertisement
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:57 am
by Socialist Czechia » Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:58 am
"Those who reached my boundary, their seed is not; their hearts and their souls are finished forever and ever. As for those who had assembled before them on the sea, the full flame was their front before the harbour mouths, and a wall of metal upon the shore surrounded them. They were dragged, overturned, and laid low upon the beach; slain and made heaps from stern to bow of their galleys, while all their things were cast upon the water." - Ramesses III., Battle of the Delta
by Settrah » Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:58 am
Fortschritte wrote:I think the ideology of anarchism is foolish, and that the idea of a anarchist society is unrealistic and undesirable.
However, I try not to judge people by their political affiliations, so I don't have one opinion for all people who are anarchists. Some anarchists are kind, smart people, while other anarchists are asssholes. I judge the individual by their actions, not their ideology. Ergo, I will not group all anarchists into one "category."
by The Cobalt Sky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:58 am
Sibirsky wrote:Servica wrote:I think they're utter jerks for promoting crime!
Get rekt skrubz
Anarchists do not promote crime.The Cobalt Sky wrote:Wouldn't those be laws then?
Also, this topic may cover this discussion:
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=322515&p=22694403#p22694403
Anarchy = no rulers.
It says nothing about laws.
by Settrah » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:00 am
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:01 am
Also, what if we happen to find no use of currency in the future? What would become of capitalism?
How would capitalism fare in a cynical and perfectionistic world?
by Zottistan » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:01 am
Anarchy Federation wrote:Yes it would be laws, because anarchism means without rulers, not without laws. And got it litorale
by The Cobalt Sky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:02 am
Settrah wrote:The Cobalt Sky wrote:Who enforces the laws, then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_class
by Servica » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:03 am
Fortschritte wrote:I think the ideology of anarchism is foolish, and that the idea of a anarchist society is unrealistic and undesirable.
However, I try not to judge people by their political affiliations, so I don't have one opinion for all people who are anarchists. Some anarchists are kind, smart people, while other anarchists are asssholes. I judge the individual by their actions, not their ideology. Ergo, I will not group all anarchists into one "category."
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:04 am
Settrah wrote:Sibirsky wrote:Cuba is socialist. Canada is capitalist. They coexist. Get it? Very basic.
So, country A gets rid of their government and becomes anarchist. Country B retains their government and stays statist.
Still confused?
Oh right, you're saying the countries co-exist in the world.
I thought you were implying that the two systems could co-exist in the same country.
Yeah, that's my bad. Misunderstood that.
by MERIZoC » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:04 am
by The GAmeTopians » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:04 am
Empire of Donner land wrote:EHEG don't stop for no one.
It's like your a prostitute and the RP is a truck. The truck don't stop.
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:04 am
Skinia wrote:Are Cuba's businesses really socially owned? Does it have any form of socialism, even state socialism?
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:05 am
Fortschritte wrote:I think the ideology of anarchism is foolish, and that the idea of a anarchist society is unrealistic and undesirable.
However, I try not to judge people by their political affiliations, so I don't have one opinion for all people who are anarchists. Some anarchists are kind, smart people, while other anarchists are asssholes. I judge the individual by their actions, not their ideology. Ergo, I will not group all anarchists into one "category."
by MERIZoC » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:06 am
Sibirsky wrote:Settrah wrote:
Oh right, you're saying the countries co-exist in the world.
I thought you were implying that the two systems could co-exist in the same country.
Yeah, that's my bad. Misunderstood that.
They could.
Business A is owned by Mr. B. It is capitalist.
Business C is owned by the 10,000 employees that work there. It is socialist.
Town D has no local government in the proper sense.
Town E has an elected council and even collects taxes.
by The Cobalt Sky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:06 am
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:07 am
by Thyskaland » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:08 am
by Skinia » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:09 am
Fortschritte wrote:I think the ideology of anarchism is foolish, and that the idea of a anarchist society is unrealistic and undesirable.
However, I try not to judge people by their political affiliations, so I don't have one opinion for all people who are anarchists. Some anarchists are kind, smart people, while other anarchists are asssholes. I judge the individual by their actions, not their ideology. Ergo, I will not group all anarchists into one "category."
by Sibirsky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:09 am
by The Cobalt Sky » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:10 am
by Saviola » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:11 am
by Terra Sector Union » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:12 am
Strobe Talbot. wrote:n the next century (now), nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single global authority and realize national sovereignty wasn’t such a great deal after all.
by MERIZoC » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:12 am
The Cobalt Sky wrote:Merizoc wrote:The people do. If person A murders someone, and the collective takes action against them, then it can be reasonably considered self-defense, since we are protecting the community from someone who employs coercion against other people.
The people would then be rulers of themselves though, right? So wouldn't there still be rulers, even if the power is far more divided?
by Skinia » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:13 am
Sibirsky wrote:Skinia wrote:They're still rulers. The 'voluntary rule' of someone over someone else doesn't make it non-rule. Hence, capitalism isn't anarchist.
Yes, they are rulers. But only in the workplace and only with the employee's consent. As such, capitalism is fully compatible with anarchism.
Sibirsky wrote:
Anarchy = no rulers, not no laws.
Most of anarchist writing deals with issues of crime, and how to address it.
In political science, you fail.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Corporate Collective Salvation, Deblar, Dumb Ideologies, Emotional Support Crocodile, Pale Dawn, Philjia, Rhaf, The Astral Mandate, Tungstan, Turenia, Valrifall, Valyxias
Advertisement