Life of a Commoner in an anarchist society

[Meinkraft]

Again, established society will not accept this new way of life. If a nation were built on such ideals as anarchy, I assure you the outcome would be very different.

why?
why would it be diffrent?
humans are still human, outside ideas will enter, people will have different beliefs.
also you really can't build a nation around anarchism, because being a nation is what anarchism opposes.

There would be no looting, or major breakdown in society, because there was no society before!
A nation needn't a government, just people who are willing to work together for a common interest.
It had been my belief that we were studying the hypothesis on its own, not with outside pressure. But, even if there is pressure from the outside, the people, if they wish to keep what they had built, will stay stagnant and retain it.

[Sociobiology]

why?
why would it be diffrent?
humans are still human, outside ideas will enter, people will have different beliefs.
also you really can't build a nation around anarchism, because being a nation is what anarchism opposes.

There would be no looting, or major breakdown in society, because there was no society before!

which would not prevent looting it would just be called raiding instead.
and it has a society, I don't think you know what society means.

A nation needn't a government, just people who are willing to work together for a common interest.

well no that is kinda what a nation is, people working together for a common interest is a movement or organization.

It had been my belief that we were studying the hypothesis on its own, not with outside pressure.

no because that would be pointless, the rest of the world exists.
also who said anything about outside pressure?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

It had been my belief that we were studying the hypothesis on its own, not with outside pressure.

Sociology is not a hermetically sealable study and neither will it be sealed unless one would like the study of the very interactions in between humans done on an individual basis. Are you labouring under the delusion that one can study sociology in a hermetically sealed and controlled environment?

[Kincoboh]

There would be no looting, or major breakdown in society, because there was no society before!

which would not prevent looting it would just be called raiding instead.
and it has a society, I don't think you know what society means.

A nation needn't a government, just people who are willing to work together for a common interest.

well no that is kinda what a nation is, people working together for a common interest is a movement or organization.

It had been my belief that we were studying the hypothesis on its own, not with outside pressure.

no because that would be pointless, the rest of the world exists.
also who said anything about outside pressure?

Say anarchism is 100% possible.
What objections to it would you have?

[Atomic Utopia]

which would not prevent looting it would just be called raiding instead.
and it has a society, I don't think you know what society means.


well no that is kinda what a nation is, people working together for a common interest is a movement or organization.


no because that would be pointless, the rest of the world exists.
also who said anything about outside pressure?

Say anarchism is 100% possible.
What objections to it would you have?

None, because the dead cannot object, and I would be dead as some fool would have broken into my home on the first day.

[Sociobiology]

which would not prevent looting it would just be called raiding instead.
and it has a society, I don't think you know what society means.


well no that is kinda what a nation is, people working together for a common interest is a movement or organization.


no because that would be pointless, the rest of the world exists.
also who said anything about outside pressure?

Say anarchism is 100% possible.
What objections to it would you have?

that it requires giving up modern technology and thus is quite harmful to the people in it.
anarchism can't exist in large populations, the whole reason we invented states and chiefdoms was once you get above a certain number of people the instinctual gossip based behavior controls break down because we can't keep track of the information on more than about ~150 people in our heads. States get around out by exploiting specialists and turning it into a formal system , and uses a largely neutral third party with overwhelming force to settle conflict. AKA police and courts, this basically removes a societies population cap.

You just can't maintain, much less produce modern technology with only a few hundred people, and a few hundred people is all anarchism can manage. You need hundreds of thousands of people in the same society to produce and maintain modern technology.

[Kincoboh]

Say anarchism is 100% possible.
What objections to it would you have?

that it requires giving up modern technology and thus is quite harmful to the people in it.
anarchism can't exist in large populations, the whole reason we invented states and chiefdoms was once you get above a certain number of people the instinctual gossip based behavior controls break down because we can't keep track of the information on more than about ~150 people in our heads. States get around out by exploiting specialists and turning it into a formal system , and uses a largely neutral third party with overwhelming force to settle conflict. AKA police and courts, this basically removes a societies population cap.

You just can't maintain, much less produce modern technology with only a few hundred people, and a few hundred people is all anarchism can manage. You need hundreds of thousands of people in the same society to produce and maintain modern technology.

No, you're thinking of anarcho-primitivism.
For example, Murray Bookchin's libertarian municipalism is specifically made for urban areas.

[The New Sea Territory]

that it requires giving up modern technology and thus is quite harmful to the people in it.
anarchism can't exist in large populations, the whole reason we invented states and chiefdoms was once you get above a certain number of people the instinctual gossip based behavior controls break down because we can't keep track of the information on more than about ~150 people in our heads. States get around out by exploiting specialists and turning it into a formal system , and uses a largely neutral third party with overwhelming force to settle conflict. AKA police and courts, this basically removes a societies population cap.

You just can't maintain, much less produce modern technology with only a few hundred people, and a few hundred people is all anarchism can manage. You need hundreds of thousands of people in the same society to produce and maintain modern technology.

No, you're thinking of anarcho-primitivism.
For example, Murray Bookchin's libertarian municipalism is specifically made for urban areas.

I left this thread a long time ago, and I suggest you do the same.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

that it requires giving up modern technology and thus is quite harmful to the people in it.
anarchism can't exist in large populations, the whole reason we invented states and chiefdoms was once you get above a certain number of people the instinctual gossip based behavior controls break down because we can't keep track of the information on more than about ~150 people in our heads. States get around out by exploiting specialists and turning it into a formal system , and uses a largely neutral third party with overwhelming force to settle conflict. AKA police and courts, this basically removes a societies population cap.

You just can't maintain, much less produce modern technology with only a few hundred people, and a few hundred people is all anarchism can manage. You need hundreds of thousands of people in the same society to produce and maintain modern technology.

No, you're thinking of anarcho-primitivism.
For example, Murray Bookchin's libertarian municipalism is specifically made for urban areas.

Call it what you want, it won't work well.

[Kincoboh]

No, you're thinking of anarcho-primitivism.
For example, Murray Bookchin's libertarian municipalism is specifically made for urban areas.

Call it what you want, it won't work well.

The system that we have now doesn't fucking work well.

[Kincoboh]

No, you're thinking of anarcho-primitivism.
For example, Murray Bookchin's libertarian municipalism is specifically made for urban areas.

I left this thread a long time ago, and I suggest you do the same.

Yeah I think I will.

[The Nuclear Fist]

No, you're thinking of anarcho-primitivism.
For example, Murray Bookchin's libertarian municipalism is specifically made for urban areas.

I left this thread a long time ago, and I suggest you do the same.

When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned tail and fled. Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Call it what you want, it won't work well.

The system that we have now doesn't fucking work well.

No, it's working well, relative to a system based on wishful thinking. Are your local roads intact? Is your police force well funded and competent? Is your local water supply clean? Are there still fish in the nearest body of water? That's so in my case, at least.

Remember, ideas are perfect. Bureaucracy is not.

[Kincoboh]

The system that we have now doesn't fucking work well.

No, it's working well, relative to a system based on wishful thinking. Are your local roads intact? Is your police force well funded and competent? Is your local water supply clean? Are there still fish in the nearest body of water? That's so in my case, at least.

Remember, ideas are perfect. Bureaucracy is not.

I'm not talking about bureaucracy, I'm talking about an economic system that isn't based on exploitation.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

No, it's working well, relative to a system based on wishful thinking. Are your local roads intact? Is your police force well funded and competent? Is your local water supply clean? Are there still fish in the nearest body of water? That's so in my case, at least.

Remember, ideas are perfect. Bureaucracy is not.

I'm not talking about bureaucracy, I'm talking about an economic system that isn't based on exploitation.

Well I'm talking about bureaucracy. You don't like it when companies exploit workers, and neither do I.

[Sibirsky]

The U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan ended its combat mission Sunday, marking the formal—if not real—end to the longest war in American history.

....so it ended the war in Afghanistan

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/if+not

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html

[The Northumbrian Republic]

It's probably amazing.

[Benuty]

It has been three months why gravedig this?

[New Skaaneland]

Because he's a born again anarchist? =)

[Nierra]

It has been three months why gravedig this?

This thread seems fun, are there many anarchists on these forums?

[Nierra]

It's probably amazing.

Or stagnant

[Mushet]

Ever notice how zombies have no rulers.

[The New Sea Territory]

Why the fuck anyone would gravedig this thread is beyond me....

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Why the fuck anyone would gravedig this thread is beyond me....

We have a better one now, with robots.

[Nierra]

Why the fuck anyone would gravedig this thread is beyond me....

Idk, it seems rather interesting though.