by Teh ebil mozlemz » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:43 pm
by New Manvir » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:45 pm
by Burol » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:46 pm
Teh ebil mozlemz wrote:Would you support the existence of a world government with at least some power?
by Conserative Morality » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:48 pm
by Lackadaisical2 » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:51 pm
Conserative Morality wrote:No. I don't believe that mankind can be effectively governed under one body, what with all the different cultures, religions, taboos, needs, etc.
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Proud member of the Vile Right-Wing Noodle Combat Division of the Imperialist Anti-Socialist Economic War Army Ground Force reporting in.
by The Archiepelago » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:53 pm
by Cameroi » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:52 pm
by Lunatic Goofballs » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:54 pm
Conserative Morality wrote:No. I don't believe that mankind can be effectively governed under one body, what with all the different cultures, religions, taboos, needs, etc.
by Kanabia » Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:00 am
The Archiepelago wrote:The only forms you can have to effectively rule with power is either a Empire or Dictatorship. At least the Dictator or Emperor can control what happens as long as they're smart with their power.
by Conserative Morality » Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:42 am
Lunatic Goofballs wrote:At least not yet. We still have too much nationalistic, racial and religious baggage. Maybe someday though.
by Emergent Quality » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:08 am
Conserative Morality wrote:That's a pretty big maybe, but it certainly is possible.
by Urstania » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:25 am
by Kingdom Brittania » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:32 am
by The Great Lord Tiger » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:34 am
Urstania wrote:And dont even try the whole "Without a government and laws everyone would kill eachother!" that argument is dead
how can you claim we need a government to stop mass bloodshed when governments are responsible for the worst mass bloodsheds in human history. 70 million people dieing at the hands of the Chinese government in the 50's through to the 70's, world war 2 killed 56 million people. thats what happens when we allow other individuals to impose thier will on another. so we should abolish all forms of power and a new order will naturally occur.
by Coffin-Breathe » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:35 am
by Coffin-Breathe » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:41 am
The Great Lord Tiger wrote:Right, anarchy kills many fewer people. Just ask all the child soldiers in Africa.
by The Great Lord Tiger » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:51 am
Coffin-Breathe wrote:The Great Lord Tiger wrote:Right, anarchy kills many fewer people. Just ask all the child soldiers in Africa.
no reply, `cause it seems you´re not having any clues to the meaning of "anarchy" or "anarchosyndicalism"...get them first, please, read up if interested, then come back for the debate of "no power for no one"...
by Tubbsalot » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:53 am
Urstania wrote:If you dont think it could work just look as Anarcho-syndicalism during the spanish civil war. there are a few documentaries on youtube about it and the Yugoslav city of Fiume which declared independence after world war 1 and was basically an anarchist state for 18 months where arts and culture flourished and fire works were held everynight and free concerts on the streets but unfortunatly supporters of the establishment and the usual spoilsports ruined it for everyone and franco took over spain and the italians sent in armed ships in Fiume.
by Urstania » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:55 am
Right, anarchy kills many fewer people. Just ask all the child soldiers in Africa.
Before you start making claims that 'an argument is dead', try to provide warrants for that point, not pointless facts. By your logic, you shouldn't have a computer, as computers have been used in military applications; no car, because wheeled vehicles have served in military service; no internet, television, telephones, or satellites, as all have contributed to death; no house, because it's been proven that most of the worst and most violent murders occur in houses --
The last point, I think, rather succinctly tells you what's wrong with your argument.
Cite your 'facts', or else quit with your misguided ranting, please.
PS: World War II? We allowed someone to 'impose their will on another'? Yeah, bullshit. It's only thanks to the alliance of GOVERNMENTS and a dedicated military body (a government institution) that prevented that imposition
by Emergent Quality » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:01 am
by The Great Lord Tiger » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:01 am
Urstania wrote:Right, anarchy kills many fewer people. Just ask all the child soldiers in Africa.
Before you start making claims that 'an argument is dead', try to provide warrants for that point, not pointless facts. By your logic, you shouldn't have a computer, as computers have been used in military applications; no car, because wheeled vehicles have served in military service; no internet, television, telephones, or satellites, as all have contributed to death; no house, because it's been proven that most of the worst and most violent murders occur in houses --
The last point, I think, rather succinctly tells you what's wrong with your argument.
Cite your 'facts', or else quit with your misguided ranting, please.
PS: World War II? We allowed someone to 'impose their will on another'? Yeah, bullshit. It's only thanks to the alliance of GOVERNMENTS and a dedicated military body (a government institution) that prevented that imposition
Anarchy is the idea no one has power over me, I am my own person I know what I need to do and live and I dont need anybody telling me how to live. Here you are saying I should have this and that if I was a true anarchist. well you dont know what anarchism is then I dont want to be apart of a movement if I cant do this and that. Every human should be the master of thier own destiny every human should be thier own leader so be an anarchist your dont have to live like a nun! its what you feel rewarding you go with it. When you have a party and you invite your friends over, some provide, drinks, food entertainment and you all have a great time with no concept of ownership as you all eat from the same bowl of chips, have a fun game of singstar. There is no concept of ownership or conflict just humans living life having fun co-operating and contributing what they can to make it bigger and better for everyone. if you have people that have sex with anybody they meet or a girl who doesnt shave her legs its about non intervention in thier life, letting them decide what is right and wrong allowing them to descover any truth without any judgement cause who am I to impose my values or will on them and they think the same as me. If everyone was open minded and tolerant or everybody elses lifestyle.
Anyway thats just my opinion using popular initiative I freely said what I wanted to without any external thing telling me what I can and cant do. So yeah you telling me I cant have this or that cause its "not Anarchist" is not what the movement is about. the movement is not about living like a nun its about the freedom to descover any truth independently without any external interference LIFE IS WHAT YOU MAKE OF IT
By the way I think my views are embryonic seeing as ive only starting reading up on and watchings documentaries on the subject since a few months ago
by Urstania » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:07 am
No, no, before you go on:
Who do you think maintains roads? Okay, fine, let's assume the big mean government disappears, but roads remain. Who's to stop people driving over the speed limit, or drinking and driving, killing people? (oh, wait, I thought anarchy improved things?) People can ignore streetlights if they want. Hell, they might have to -- power goes down when you don't have a structured system for the production and distribution of electricity. Not that the electric plants could work anyway -- lack of maintenance on the railways means that, within years, it'll be far too dangerous for coal trains to haul fuel to power plants. But that's okay, right? "No power for no one", indeed.
And people won't commit crime with anarchy? Is that what you really think? So crimes of passion will no longer exist, people won't go on psychotic rampages, all of that will stop in honor of the amazing new system? But wait! Those rampagers are eventually stopped by cops, right? No more cops. Guess civilians will have to step in, risking their lives unwillingly. And by the way, how do all of these civilians have weapons? There's no longer firearm registration -- so, what, just go to a cornerstore and pick up a couple pistols as a birthday present for your friends? What a pal.
I feel sorry for anarchists who delude themselves into thinking that such a system would stop war. Would it? How would that stop the feelings of greed and desire that breed in the hearts of some people? And how do you keep those people from imposing harm on the society? You can't lock them up -- municipal jails won't exist anymore. Your ideas all float on the concept that everyone in the world shares your values of greed being non-inherent. Incorrect. If that were the case, the concept of 'property' wouldn't exist in the first place.
Oh, and out of curiosity: Why would warlords, who desire domination over people and territory, care that governments don't exist? Hell, that would make their job easier, because there would be noone to stand in their way.
Warlord-controlled parts of Africa ARE anarchies. There is no central government, no semblance of order.. Don't try to pretend that it isn't REALLY anarchy because its grim truth is outside your fantasy.
by The Great Lord Tiger » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:13 am
Urstania wrote:No, no, before you go on:
Who do you think maintains roads? Okay, fine, let's assume the big mean government disappears, but roads remain. Who's to stop people driving over the speed limit, or drinking and driving, killing people? (oh, wait, I thought anarchy improved things?) People can ignore streetlights if they want. Hell, they might have to -- power goes down when you don't have a structured system for the production and distribution of electricity. Not that the electric plants could work anyway -- lack of maintenance on the railways means that, within years, it'll be far too dangerous for coal trains to haul fuel to power plants. But that's okay, right? "No power for no one", indeed.
And people won't commit crime with anarchy? Is that what you really think? So crimes of passion will no longer exist, people won't go on psychotic rampages, all of that will stop in honor of the amazing new system? But wait! Those rampagers are eventually stopped by cops, right? No more cops. Guess civilians will have to step in, risking their lives unwillingly. And by the way, how do all of these civilians have weapons? There's no longer firearm registration -- so, what, just go to a cornerstore and pick up a couple pistols as a birthday present for your friends? What a pal.
I feel sorry for anarchists who delude themselves into thinking that such a system would stop war. Would it? How would that stop the feelings of greed and desire that breed in the hearts of some people? And how do you keep those people from imposing harm on the society? You can't lock them up -- municipal jails won't exist anymore. Your ideas all float on the concept that everyone in the world shares your values of greed being non-inherent. Incorrect. If that were the case, the concept of 'property' wouldn't exist in the first place.
Oh, and out of curiosity: Why would warlords, who desire domination over people and territory, care that governments don't exist? Hell, that would make their job easier, because there would be noone to stand in their way.
Warlord-controlled parts of Africa ARE anarchies. There is no central government, no semblance of order.. Don't try to pretend that it isn't REALLY anarchy because its grim truth is outside your fantasy.
So do you believe humans are inherently evil? that humans are so bloodthirsty that laws are the only things stopping people from killing themselves? We have laws banning murder but it doesnt stop murder does it? there are fuckwits in any system but whats to say absolute freedom wouldnt produce a better world?
How did you enjoy your chirstmas? did you have a big family gathering? did you all pool resources together and make a big meal for everyone to enjoy. I went to the beach with my family, set up badmington had some booze and everyone did thier part to co-operate in making a good thing. Me and my sister didint mind if anybody wanted to use the badmington set. we said hi to everyone, everyone was getting along enjoying themselves, If life was made up of those moments and if a child was born in a life like that everyday its a day you can be proud off and find truly rewarding.
Do you have any dreams? perhaps you wanted to be a film maker, an actor, artist, singer, mechanic, cook? in an anarchist society if anything was free and open nothing would stop you from reaching your dreams. Budding singers could organize open mic concerts in a stadium owned by the people, people could freely broadcast on a pirate radio station anything they wanted, film makers could have the resources they need and budding actors would have a movie to star in no matter what they looked at. Its about mutual appreciation and respect for everyone's dreams and aspirations
If I hear shitty music I know that some people like it and I can appreciate what the artist has put into it but its just my perception and preference that its not my type of music. I asked my work mate that in an anarchist society what would he want to do with his spare time he said he would just like to work on cars all day long. so anybody with car problems can freely go to someone who is passionate about fixing cars. he can put in what he loves and take out what he needs.
My grandad loved making home brew perhaps I could of learn that skill. and if we get our booze for free then we can freely take it into a restaurant and drink it without having to buy thier alcohol. anybody could reach any dream they wanted to without any external restrictions.
Why cant life be made up of rewarding spontaneous moments? do you feel you need someone to tell you how to live your life?
Anarchism is the idea that no one is more qualified then YOU ARE to tell you how to live your life
by Emergent Quality » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:15 am
Urstania wrote:If I hear shitty music I know that some people like it and I can appreciate what the artist has put into it but its just my perception and preference that its not my type of music.
Urstania wrote:I asked my work mate that in an anarchist society what would he want to do with his spare time he said he would just like to work on cars all day long. so anybody with car problems can freely go to someone who is passionate about fixing cars. he can put in what he loves and take out what he needs.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Cheblonsk, Emotional Support Crocodile, Free Stalliongrad, Hurdergaryp, Ifreann, Infected Mushroom, Tungstan
Advertisement