Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
Anarchism
    #14461171 -

Do you feel that anarchism is a meaningful and relevant political philosophy?

Do any of you consider yourself political anarchists?

If so , what does anarchism mean to you?

I have done some research on Anarchism, and it seems to be making an unexpected resurgence in the form of incorporation into the global anti-globalization/alternative-globalization.

Anarchism seems to mean three things: an emphasis on direct political action (protests and direct resistance), a conviction that no meaningful change will ever be allowed from within the dominant system, and a commitment to building community and individual level solutions to problems rather than relying on the state.

Anarchism also seems to be allied with feminism, environmentalism, social justice movements and indigenous people's struggles.

It seems that as more and more people lose confidence in the government and other major institutions, Anarchism will have a wider and wider appeal.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467158 -

Good, this way they can create a new government about which they will be pissed off in no time. :smile:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: MushroomTrip] * 1
    #14467215 -

MushroomTrip said:
Good, this way they can create a new government about which they will be pissed off in no time. :smile:


ding ding ding.


in the absence of a government, gang rule wins.  How do well-mannered citizens protect their assets from the gangs?  they form a police force.  how do you pay for a police force?  collect taxes from thsoe the force is protecting.  Wait, fuck, we have a government again.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #14467556 -

So are you of the opinion that government is inevitable and inescapable, and that therefore the anarchist project is futile?

Is it impossible for humans to develop egalitarian, freely organized societies and social organizations that are non-hierarchical, non-authoritarian, consensual and consensus based?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467579 -

Maybe in the future, but not now.  Many will argue that human instinct, greed, and jealousy would screw things up, but I ask: are these things truly natural?  Or are we socialized to believe they are natural.  I can see both sides to the answer of this question. 

However, I think that those traits of greed, lust, and a drive for power must be eradicated or significantly diminished for there to be an anarchy.  Same thing with true communism.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467600 -

Solomon Ash said:
So are you of the opinion that government is inevitable and inescapable, and that therefore the anarchist project is futile?


Absolutely. The strong will always dominate the weak. The smart will always dominate the stupid. The criminal, left unchecked will always dominate the law abiding.



Quote:
Is it impossible for humans to develop egalitarian, freely organized societies and social organizations that are non-hierarchical, non-authoritarian, consensual and consensus based?


At this point in our development? Absolutely.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467643 -

Quote:
So are you of the opinion that government is inevitable and inescapable, and that therefore the anarchist project is futile?


That's about it. No society worthy of the descriptor "civilized" can exist for long absent a government. All that is left to decide is in how many areas the citizens of that society will allow their government to be the final arbiter. No rational society of which I am aware has ever decided that government should involve itself in less than the irreducible minimum of the following four key areas...

- military
- criminal justice system (objective body of law, cops, courts, prisons)
- contract law and civil law (objective body of law, courts, fines, contract arbitration)
- foreign relations (State department, ambassadors, diplomacy, etc.)

...although there is no shortage of societies who have decided to allow their governments far more power than this. The above list represents the minimum necessary areas to which Anarchism has no realistically effective approach. As has been pointed out already, in the absence of a government handling these four areas (especially the first three) then society degenerates into "might is right" at the entry of the first thug into that society.

Quote:
Is it impossible for humans to develop egalitarian, freely organized societies and social organizations that are non-hierarchical, non-authoritarian, consensual and consensus based?


It is not strictly speaking impossible for some very small groups (like a few hundreds at most) of like-minded and incredibly disciplined humans to secrete themselves away somewhere for a few years or even a few decades and live this kind of lifestyle temporarily. It would end up being a subsistence lifestyle and would be ultimately doomed from the start, but I'm guessing it is not impossible that several good years could pass before the inevitable crash.






Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Phred]
    #14467661 -

Good points, all.

But I wonder

"No rational society of which I am aware has ever decided that government should involve itself in less than the irreducible minimum of the following four key areas...

- military
- criminal justice system (objective body of law, cops, courts, prisons)
- contract law and civil law (objective body of law, courts, fines, contract arbitration)"

Isn't it precisely because we give governments control over the military that we have trillion dollar a year military budgets while people starve, and nuclear bombs being detonated and stockpiled, and thousands of innocent civilians being killed in wars around the world?

And is it not because we give the government control of criminal justice that we have a global war on drugs, thousands of peaceful drug users in prison, and an increasing proportion of the population locked up?

Is it not because of the governments property laws that we have an increasing gap between rich and poor, and the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few?

So what is so rational about any of that?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467715 -

Step 1: Kill all humans.

Step 2: Replace them with pink unicorns.

Step 3: Anarchy.


--------------------
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-renee-goods-wife-and-son

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467753 -

Quote:
Isn't it precisely because we give governments control over the military that we have trillion dollar a year military budgets while people starve, and nuclear bombs being detonated and stockpiled, and thousands of innocent civilians being killed in wars around the world?


And what has led you to believe that real-world choices are always between a good outcome and a bad outcome? When dealing with imperfect beings (and humans are decidedly imperfect), the usual choice is between "sub-optimal" and "nowhere even close to optimal".

Further, while it is true that bad things can happen when governments run national militaries, the degree of badness can to a large extent be controlled by the citizens' lack of tolerance for government idiocy. Trillion dollar militaries are not an inevitability. And, of course, world hunger has no relevance to the necessity of a government-run military one way or the other.

Quote:
And is it not because we give the government control of criminal justice that we have a global war on drugs, thousands of peaceful drug users in prison, and an increasing proportion of the population locked up?


Again, it is up to the citizens of a society to reign in governments when they go to far. Once again you try to use one of the few disadvantages of having a government-run legal system in an attempt to invalidate the entire concept. Although I abhor drug prohibition, I would much rather just expend a bit of effort to smoke my weed away from government eyes than live in a society where gangs ruled all. That is such a minor inconvenience that the decision is a total no-brainer.

Quote:
Is it not because of the governments property laws that we have an increasing gap between rich and poor, and the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few?


No. Not even close.

Quote:
So what is so rational about any of that?


Everything.






Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14467768 -

Solomon Ash said:
Isn't it precisely because we give governments control over the military that we have trillion dollar a year military budgets while people starve, and nuclear bombs being detonated and stockpiled, and thousands of innocent civilians being killed in wars around the world?



Eliminating the military budget would not fix poverty.  Don't confuse the two.  If it didnt take more than $3 of taxpayer dollars to distribute $1 of social welfare I might agree, but with such inefficiencies, i think we're better off spending it on military and keeping our markets secure (right? isnt that what military does now?)

Solomon Ash said:
And is it not because we give the government control of criminal justice that we have a global war on drugs, thousands of peaceful drug users in prison, and an increasing proportion of the population locked up?



No, it is because we give government control over criminal justice that your big asshole alcoholic neighbor cant' come over and fuck your wife and steal your food and car.  Drug laws came to be as a result of public sentiment regarding substances, and the drafting of those laws was done by specific individuals.  Do not blame the existance of drug persecution on the presence of a court system.  Thats dumb.



Solomon Ash said:
Is it not because of the governments property laws that we have an increasing gap between rich and poor, and the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few?



No, its becuase of government property laws that individuals had the incentive to invest into their land, their homes, and their future.  Without the ability to own what you earn, there is no incentive to be productivei - social leeching prevails.







Its pretty simple:  we've reached the point that find ourselves in because it makes (more-or-less) the most sense.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Orium]
    #14467800 -

Orium said:
but I ask: are these things truly natural?



And I ask: what, in your opinion, then, IS natural? What would classify these things as unnatural?


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #14468508 -

Baboons have government.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14468887 -

I like the anarchy in most politicaly-active squats :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14470484 -

Solomon Ash said:
what does anarchism mean to you?


Somalia.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: memes]
    #14470756 -

meams said:
1) Eliminating the military budget would not fix poverty.  Don't confuse the two.  If it didnt take more than $3 of taxpayer dollars to distribute $1 of social welfare I might agree, but with such inefficiencies, i think we're better off spending it on military and keeping our markets secure (right? isnt that what military does now?)

2) No, it is because we give government control over criminal justice that your big asshole alcoholic neighbor cant' come over and fuck your wife and steal your food and car.  Drug laws came to be as a result of public sentiment regarding substances, and the drafting of those laws was done by specific individuals.  Do not blame the existance of drug persecution on the presence of a court system.  Thats dumb.


3) No, its becuase of government property laws that individuals had the incentive to invest into their land, their homes, and their future.  Without the ability to own what you earn, there is no incentive to be productivei - social leeching prevails.

4) Its pretty simple:  we've reached the point that find ourselves in because it makes (more-or-less) the most sense.




1) Actually, if we reduced the military budget, we could also reduce taxes and then private and government dollars could be used towards more socially beneficial endeavors.  Higher quality education, more research funding, etc. and less money sunk into roads, military bases, and hand-outs/bribes in foreign countries that are unfriendly to us.  Also, I think that you would find a popular vote showing more favor for welfare than our warmongering in the Middle East.  It always gets me that certain people want to reduce government spending and privatize everything EXCEPT for the military.  When was the last time any legislation was passed to reduce military spending or influence?

2)  Actually if our government wasn't working so hard to take away our freedoms and to make sure that we have less access to guns every year, then we could more easily defend ourselves from our unlawful neighbors.  BTW, the last I heard, if someone wants to rape your wife, kill you, and steal your car - they're gonna do it anyway.  Cops aren't precogs yet...  Anyway, I don't know about you, but I don't need a legal system to protect myself from an unruly neighbor.  Actually, living in the overbearing legal system that we do it is often difficult to defend yourself without being charged for a crime for doing so.  Of course, there are subtle ways to deal with problematic people that don't leave much evidence.  You just have to have the balls to carry through with them.  That's one of the biggest problems in our society - lack of nuts on all sides. 

And as far as public sentiment on drug laws goes, give me a break.  My history book doesn't show protests in the street demanding that drugs be banned.  Official lies and corruption were the reasons that the drug laws were enacted.  The government lied to the people about the evils of drugs just like they do today.  Look at Montana if you need any evidence of what the true public consent is worth.  The legislature ignores the will of the people in favor of their cronies' interests everyday and on all issues.   

3)  Please elaborate on your knowledge of property laws.  I have a feeling that you are blowing smoke here.  I will admit that I don't have enough knowledge to make an informed statement on property law.  Will you?

4)  Its pretty simple:  We've backed away from conflict with wealthy and powerful institutions and individuals and allowed them to legislate our freedoms away from us.  THAT is why things are as they are.  Ask any person on the street and they will tell you that the system is completely fucked.  Makes no sense to most people.  But I guess we're all just to dumb to get it.  That's why we need all these smart people to run things for us and tell us what to do.  At least that's what they tell us as they tighten the cinch on our balls.


Fuck all governments.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Joe Joe]
    #14471909 -

You're argument is silly.  And I have no need to elaborate on my property law knowledge.  I dont know dick about individual property laws, but i DO know that if I dont own my property, I have no incentive to maintain or improve it, since the fruits of that property are not my own.

Its logic.  Those of us who have the ability to rationally think use it well.




Regarding your counterpoints:  they're more-or-less silly.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Joe Joe]
    #14472074 -

Joe Joe writes:

Quote:
Actually, if we reduced the military budget, we could also reduce taxes...


This is self-evident, and can be accurately said of every other government function funded by taxes. It does nothing, however, to show that the military should not be under control of government.

Quote:
It always gets me that certain people want to reduce government spending and privatize everything EXCEPT for the military.


Military is one of the VERY few (one out of just four) legitimate functions of government. It is thus no surprise so many people want to privatize nearly everything else government does today... i.e. your examples of "socially beneficial endeavours". The US federal government has no business funding higher education or research.

Quote:
Anyway, I don't know about you, but I don't need a legal system to protect myself from an unruly neighbor.


No? Suppose circumstances arise which lead a number of intelligent people in your immediate area to logically conclude it is you (rather than a transient who bears a remarkable resemblance to you) who has been diddling kiddies at the local playground and they form a posse to visit justice upon you at four in the morning one night. You'd be okay with that?




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Phred]
    #14472377 -

The interesting thing is that it is just as easy to think of horror stories about governments as horror stories about lack of governments.

For example, if my neighbour is a homicidal maniac, It would be terrifying not to be able to call the police for help.

At the same time, corrupt governments who kick your door down, drag you out of bed and throw you in a cell without a trial are probably even scarier, if only because they wield so much power.

It really depends. If you live in a good safe community with good people, government might be more harm than help.

And if you live in a country with an excellent, trustworthy, transparent government, government might be your best friend.

But when you live in the land of the patriot act, FEMA camps, nuclear weapons silo's, massive inequality and perpetual unprovoked wars around the world, where you can be locked up for smoking a joint and harassed for being a minority or a suspected "terrorist"... you might start wishing for less government presence instead of more.


I think we can all imagine situations where a friendly government would be of great help. But lets not forget that a government gone bad is more terrifying than any individual psycho or gang.

The Nazis were a well-ordered and well organized government, and similar atrocities have been committed by the governments of Pinochet in Chile and PoL Pot in Cambodia.

So its not simple, is all I am saying. Both sides have their horrors.

The thing is, a few good people can usually resist a few evil people. But when the government itself, with its stranglehold on the military, prisons and police goes haywire, the citizens are in real danger.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Anarchism [Re: Solomon Ash]
    #14472536 -

Quote:
But when you live in the land of the patriot act, FEMA camps, nuclear weapons silo's, massive inequality and perpetual unprovoked wars around the world, where you can be locked up for smoking a joint and harassed for being a minority or a suspected "terrorist"...


Oh please! Let's try to avoid hysterically exaggerated drama queen pronouncements for the rest of this thread, okay?

Quote:
...you might start wishing for less government presence instead of more.


"Less" is not a synonym for "zero". I have always advocated for the minimum  possible government presence in the lives of a society's citizens. But I recognize the enormous and fundamental divide between a minimal presence and a total absence. Anarchists, sadly, do not.

Quote:
The Nazis were a well-ordered and well organized government, and similar atrocities have been committed by the governments of Pinochet in Chile and PoL Pot in Cambodia.


You seem to be arguing that because a very, very few governments over the course of human history have led to results arguably worse than total chaos and ubiquitous gang warfare, we should not institute governments. That is of course an absurd stance to hold. Governments do not inevitably devolve into Nazi Germanys and Commie Cambodias. Once again, you make the common Anarchist error of condemning "better" because it is not "perfect". Life almost never gives us choices with no potential downsides whatsoever. Rational people recognize this undeniable truth. Anarchists, sadly, do not.

Quote:
The thing is, a few good people can usually resist a few evil people.


And if that were all that were ever likely to pop up - a few evil people show up every now and then - your argument might sort of hold water, a little bit. But of course, Attila the Hun was in charge of more than a few people. As was Adolph Hitler. And Josef Stalin. And Pol Pot. Or Charles Manson.

And of course we haven't even begun to address the far more common situation - contract disputes between two good people acting in complete and sincere good faith. 









Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* God is an Anarchist.
( 1 2 all )		 Baby_Hitler 4,958 33 07/21/05 01:12 PM
by rogue_pixie
* An Anarchistic Socialistic Democratic Society
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Teotzlcoatl 7,052 63 07/27/07 03:57 PM
by Teotzlcoatl
* An Ontological Anarchists critique of traditional activism and reality? Mystic_Cannibal 1,580 9 01/06/08 09:55 PM
by zorbman
* Communist Anarchism DigitalDuality 1,012 6 05/05/04 03:55 AM
by BleaK
* You May Already Be An Anarchist.
( 1 2 3 all )		 FutureExPatriot 5,161 45 10/16/02 01:16 AM
by zeronio
* America. the threat to its self...
( 1 2 all )		 GabbaDj 4,068 29 02/21/02 08:50 AM
by Phred
* Anarchists being harrased y police/ May Day Riots PGF 1,601 3 06/04/02 08:49 AM
by hongomon
* The Reluctant Anarchist Evolving 2,079 17 06/12/04 09:27 PM
by RandalFlagg

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
3,301 topic views. 2 members, 177 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 18 queries.