Pittsburgh group plans to storm recruiting office and "cage" recruiters...

[wooderson]

Anarchism is not the promotion of and desire for anarchy? Please explain.

There's about 180 years worth of philosophical writing on 'modern' anarchism, and dozens of subdivisions (some of which - anarcho-capitalism vs. anarcho-communism, etc. - scarcely consider each other 'anarchist' for various reasons) - but suffice to say they aren't talking about the complete abolition of all social organization and utter chaos. Left-anarchism seeks to remake society in a broadly democratic and cooperative vein (which is why they tended to get shot under Bolshevik/Communist/Maoist/etc. regimes), right-anarchism generally seeks to protect the rights of the individual through 'market solutions.'

One thing that makes it easier to understand - left-anarchism was originally known as 'libertarianism' in the 19th century (or libertarian socialism later on), and still goes by that in Europe (where our American 'libertarianism' is basically non-existent).

[Perd Hapley]

But Strings, people only do things like that because of their is govermints. 

[Racehorse]

Anarchism is not the promotion of and desire for anarchy? Please explain.

There's about 180 years worth of philosophical writing on 'modern' anarchism, and dozens of subdivisions (some of which - anarcho-capitalism vs. anarcho-communism, etc. - scarcely consider each other 'anarchist' for various reasons) - but suffice to say they aren't talking about the complete abolition of all social organization and utter chaos. Left-anarchism seeks to remake society in a broadly democratic and cooperative vein (which is why they tended to get shot under Bolshevik/Communist/Maoist/etc. regimes), right-anarchism generally seeks to protect the rights of the individual through 'market solutions.'

One thing that makes it easier to understand - left-anarchism was originally known as 'libertarianism' in the 19th century (or libertarian socialism later on), and still goes by that in Europe (where our American 'libertarianism' is basically non-existent).

What you describe as left-anarchism sounds more like populism to me. What you describe as right-anarchism sounds more like conservatism. If they really aren't for the abolition of government, why do they call themselves anarchists? Is it because they don't know what the word means? Because it sounds cooler? Because it has more shock value? I seriously don't get it.

Any form of social order is a form of government. Just because it's not some huge bureaucratic organization doesn't mean it's not a government. Maybe I'm not understanding you, but it seems like you're saying that anarchists just want a different form of government. If that's the case, then they're not really anarchists, whatever they want to call themselves.

[The Annoyed Man]

Dude... no trying to shirk your responsibility! We all KNOW it's YOUR fault!

[wooderson]

If they really aren't for the abolition of government, why do they call themselves anarchists?

Again, they very often don't call themselves "anarchists."

They are (broadly speaking, again, this is a wide vein) advocating for the abolition of the state as we know it. It's arguable whether the social structures they wish to implement in its stead constitute a government (or de facto government). They aren't for "anarchy" as in chaos and disorder and a lack of social organization (ie being able to murder with impunity).

If you believe that the only reason we, as humans, don't continually rape, pillage and murder is the stern, fatherly hand of the modern state on a day-to-day basis (which is not an unreasonable view), then anarchism of any stripe probably isn't going to make sense to you.

If that's the case, then they're not really anarchists, whatever they want to call themselves.

You have an endpoint in mind for 'anarchists' to strive for, and then criticizing them for not striving for it. You've set the game up to run by your own rules and they can't win it. You need to look at their stated ideal, rather than what you think they're idealizing.

As to the issue of selling out one's kiddos to pedos - that's happening under our system of laws and governance, right? Do we know that there are far more parents out there who'd do so if it weren't illegal?

[The Annoyed Man]

The reason I brought up domestic human trafficking was to illustrate why I don't have "faith in humanity"

[wooderson]

Right, but our current system, then, isn't particularly capable of reining in human nature on that point either, is it?

[freakazoid]

Your arguments for being against an anarchist society, the chaos etc, are using the exact same reasoning that people are against people being allowed to own firearms.

No, he's saying that humans have been known to do this.  His overall point is that humanity is not something that deserves your trust.

I think it does, if humanity is so bad then why don't you think we should be living under a totalitarian government then?

Now, you expect me to, after seeing stuff like this, have faith in humanity?

So you basically allow a few bad apples to spoil the bunch then? While you prefer to look at the few bad things that people have done to each other, I prefer to look at the good things.

And before you try claiming I'm full of it,

I know that that happens, even thought there are laws saying not to.

You should probably just keep forgetting it.  If you look into it even a little bit, that argument falls apart.  It's just so off-base and silly, in so many ways.

If it is so apparent then surely you can explain yourself.

Here is the part from the Journals of Lewis and Clark I promised,

Lewis - Monday August 19th 1805

from what has been said of the Shoshones it will be readily percieved that they live in a wretched stait of poverty. yet notwithstanding their estreem poverty they are not only cheerfull but even gay, fond of gaudy dress and amusements; like most other Indians they are great egotists and frequently boast of heroic acts which they never performed, they are also fond of games of wrisk. they are frank communicative, fair in dealing, generous with the little they possess, extremely honest, and by no means beggarly. each individual is his own sovereign master, and acts from the dictates of his own mind; the authority of the Cheif being nothing more than mere admonation supported by the influence which the prop[r]iety of his own examplary conduct may have acquired him in the minds of the individuals who compose the band. the title of cheif is not hereditary, nor can I learn that there is any cerimony of instalment, or other epo[c]h in the life of a Cheif from which his title as such can be dated. in fact every man is a chief, but all have not an equal influence on the mind of the other members of the community, and he who happens to enjoy the greatest share of confidence is the principle Chief.

[The Annoyed Man]

Let me make something nice and sparkling clear. If you're squeemish, skip the part between the lines...







*****************************************************************************************

>So you basically allow a few bad apples to spoil the bunch then? While you prefer to look at the few bad things that people have done to each other, I prefer to look at the good things.<

Ok... let me explain where I got this.

 I was called for a case in another state. Only thing *I* knew going in was that a child needed help.

 Turns out that the "child" in this case was 19 years old: her father had been raping her since she was 4. When she got a little older, he started taking her to hotels and apartments, where he'd "rent her services" to others of his persuasion. He was also selling and trading pictures of her to his "buds". All the while, her mother not only knew, but encouraged, the continuing abuse.

 When she went away to college, he would go to her dorm and continue the abuse. This is where I got involved.

 Through a few days, we helped get her away from dad, clear her dorm and belongings from home, and send her out of state. Unfortunately, psychological conditioning kicked in, and she ended up back with her "loving family".

 She WAS, at one point, admitted to the hospital for observation: she had tried killing herself. The local rape councilor had left word that her father was NOT to have access to her. After two days, her father signed her out and took her home.

 We tried getting her to leave again, but her family has kept her brother on "watch" to keep her from trying to leave again. This is when we found out the technical term, and how hard it is to deal with. The police were completely unwilling to help.

 See, victims are SO psychologically conditioned, that getting testimony is almost impossible. Unless you find photos or video, it's desperately hard to gain testimony. Point of fact, even WITH such proof, it's usually difficult.

****************************************************************************************

 So... does this maybe give you some idea where my "lack of faith in humanity" might come from?

 

[Perd Hapley]

No, he's saying that humans have been known to do this.  His overall point is that humanity is not something that deserves your trust.

I think it does, if humanity is so bad then why don't you think we should be living under a totalitarian government then? 

Because that would require faith in humanity.  So far, a representative republic seems to be the best option for safeguarding our liberties.  Someone has said that the goal should be a system of laws, not of men.  In other words, faith in reason and compromise, rather than in the virtue of the masses, or the virtue of an elite.   

Now, you expect me to, after seeing stuff like this, have faith in humanity?

So you basically allow a few bad apples to spoil the bunch then? While you prefer to look at the few bad things that people have done to each other, I prefer to look at the good things.

I can't speak for Strings, but I can ask that you look around you.  People are not basically good.  We are basically flawed. 

[The Annoyed Man]

>People are not basically good.  We are basically flawed.<

That's a REALLY polite way of saying it. I could think of more accurate words, but they wouldn't be allowed by the mods...

[Perd Hapley]

You Wiccans are so judgmental.  Not like us Christians.

[The Annoyed Man]

Hey... let's play "Christian denomination: Lutheran". I'll be Martin Luther, and you can be my thesis...