Anarchism, what was your stumbling block?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by hawkeye, Jun 25, 2014.

  1. Old Codger

    Old Codger Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    4,936
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Splitting straws I think they call it!

    ANY organisation or group that is 'governed', is living under a 'government', along with a rule book and punishment system.


    OC
     
  2. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,777
    Likes Received:
    522
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    And that is the problem, Anarchists may not look anything like the media portrays them, but if the media and the government are in each other's pockets then anarchists will continue to be portrayed as hooligans.

    Look at the Liberal Democratic Party, they wanted to reduce government excesses and many other things that make perfect sense to most people but the main coverage was about how they wanted to give everyone guns.

    I think if you explain the theory to people they will nod along quite interested but as soon as you mention the word 'anarchy' you will lose them.

    Can you be a practicing anarchist and live within the Australian system? Even if you don't feel you should be subject to the laws and taxes you still are.
     
  3. sammysilver

    sammysilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    6,132
    Likes Received:
    776
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sydney
    Yes, but that does not absolve them from acting against the government of the day. If they are running autonomous to this government by ignoring the law of the land, haven't they effectively toppled it as far as they are concerned? My examples are not as overt as the drug lords of Columbia and Mexico but each challenges the stewardship of the government.
     
  4. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,955
    Likes Received:
    2,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Let's get the definitions out of the way:

    a. government: a group of people with the authority to conduct the policy, affairs and actions of others through the subordination of individual liberty.

    b. anarchy: an absence of the above.
     
  5. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,955
    Likes Received:
    2,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    I assume you are not talking about yourself, your own family members or friends when you utter that. It is your opinion only, it has no basis in fact otherwise civilisation as we know it would not exist. Most people are not stupid, most people are not ruled by fear and most people are not greedy.

    Just one branch of anarchist thought, in this case (if it was Spain) one that subordinates the liberty of the individual for the benefit of a collective.
     
  6. Old Codger

    Old Codger Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    4,936
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Final comment!

    The SILLIEST idea I have ever heard!

    OC
     
  7. lucky luke

    lucky luke Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Qld
    I think some people tried it about 40 years ago by living at Cedar Bay in Qld. :)

    and who's that fellow who set up his own monetary system on a cattle property over in WA?

    Just two very different examples of groups trying to work outside of the system. They aren't technically "anarchist" but their actions lend towards anarchistic tendencies. :)

    .................. and I don't think there was any significant petrol bombing or hooliganism associated with both groups either. Some reprehensible dope smoking and free sex perhaps.
     
  8. lucky luke

    lucky luke Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Qld
    Some of us don't think it is quite so silly. And so some of us will likely continue with the threads discussions as such discussions promoting thought. It's called philosophising. "Final comment!" noted.
     
  9. trew

    trew Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,811
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbern
  10. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,955
    Likes Received:
    2,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    It hasn't died out, just nothing more to add at the moment.

    Why do you put greater faith in the ability of one select group of people to govern your life than in your own?
     
  11. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,777
    Likes Received:
    522
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    Nimbin, and the Hutt River Province.

    Nimbin still has the Australian Police interfering with their way of life though and the Hutt River Province is limited to one family on their own property from what I can gather, (they are still doing better than me though to be honest, but if it wasn't for the rest of my family, I too would be free to govern most of my own actions within the limits of my property)

    If there was free sex then we would all drop the labour/libral sham in a heart beat.
     
  12. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    From all accounts compared to life under the regime prior to the civil war and Franco and the fascists subsequently, anarchism seemed to have been a massive improvement in the lives of the average person. The injustices under the state before and after (and during the resurrection) seemed to have been far more egregious. Essentially there really was a class based system with one set of rules for "the rich" and another for the "average workers". Beatings and killings of union leaders and anarchists demanding better working conditions etc that went without punishment and justice indicates to me that there was a massive deficiency in the application of a uniform justice system. I reckon that a lot of the anti-capitalist rhetoric and hate speech on the internet comes from countries such as Spain which had extremely unjust legal systems and real oppression of individual rights. Besides the (much milder) crony-capitalism in English-speaking liberal democracies, a lot of the hate is directed at completely the wrong targets and capitalists become scape-goats for all kinds of ills that are actually the result of abuse of government privileges and an unjust and unequal rule of law.

    Further, besides dealing with a culture in turmoil, the anarchism that was adopted were various left-anarchist systems (particularly anarcho-syndicalism). The pent up hatred for the so-called "capitalist" class in Spain meant that they basically moved toward Marxism/Collectivism. These systems have been demonstrably proven to be able to successfully exist and be maintained for a while numerous times around the world throughout history (see the Kibbutzes for peaceful contemporary examples). But (from my right-anarchist perspective), they are fundamentally flawed because they cannot appropriately price capital. Over time this leads to extreme politicking and internal systems of repression to progress and to maintain the capital that the collective began with (which inevitably gets run down or becomes out of date compared to alternative technologies). In essence you get rid of a system where centralised politics and subjective decisions creates injustices via the iron hand of the state in favour of a system in which subjective politics becomes embedded in a decentralised system right down to the factory level.

    To your other point - I agree that we are social animals who need rules. However, I do not agree that the rules need to come from a privileged group of people who have a monopoly on the initiation of force (or as Ibn Khaldun said "an institution which prevents injustice other than such as it commits itself").
     
  13. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    There's lots of free sex. It's just that the other party is free to say no ;)
     
  14. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    To me, the best system of justice is one that appropriately compensates the victims. A restitution based system if you will rather than a punishment based system.

    I am a big believer in a Common Law style system that discovers and builds up, case by case, what is "the law". Asking a question like "if somebody kills somebody what happens" is far too vague and is Civil Law style thinking in which a group of very smart people write laws and punishments for every possible circumstance that they can dream up. In contrast I favour a system that discovers the truth in individual circumstances and applies a restitution/punishment fit for the crime as determined by the victim and your peers.

    I am against vigilante style justice systems (because they typically cause far too much injustice), but it would require enough other people in a local region to think similarly to be able to fund the alternative. Based on history, I don't think this is a particularly big hurdle.

    For most criminal law (and all contract law) issues, a surety system would work very well. In a few extreme cases there would be a horrendous crime of some sort that possibly warrants something beyond whatever the surety system could bear (at that point in time). What should happen next is an interesting and important question and people like Murray Rothbard have given their views (opting for concepts like an eye for an eye, hence the killer may be put to death). In my opinion, as we are effectively deterministically determined automatons a rehabilitation system is far more appropriate. How would such a system be incentivised is interesting to think about. One method I have come across would be that people could own "shares" in another person. The purchase price may be used to compensate the victim and the share holder would be able to earn, say, 10% of all future earnings from the criminal. Hence, they would be incentivised to rehabilitate the criminal and get them back into the community in a productive fashion. I'm sure there are others.
     
  15. JulieW

    JulieW Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,033
    Likes Received:
    2,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    The reason we've the current police state form of government is because of these type of people.
    We have the bureaucracy because it's the best way to employ these people (Canberra highest per capita income for instance).
    When the hand of the State was soft it was good. Witness the USA Constitution which was a wonderful document when it operated.

    Now we have this:
    [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1_dfv0HGuA[/youtube]


    As Lao Tzu said 'Govern a state as you would cook a small fish'.
     
  16. col0016

    col0016 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,546
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Australia, Melbourne
    Bord, if you believe that self ownership is a fundamental right how can you advocate people being able to buy shares in prisoners? Essentially creating slavery in a much less abstract way than we have now.

    What right does any group of people have to punish somebody for their actions if they are not involved? E.g A kills B and X, Y and Z decide a punishment?
    If you involved the families it would just be based on revenge, if it was outsiders then arguably they don't have any right to take away somebody's life or liberty anyway.
     
  17. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,777
    Likes Received:
    522
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    But isn't this a direct result of the society that we have built today?

    ...By taking so much money from people's paypackets they have to buy stuff in sales.

    ...Shops having to sell items for as much as they can to...

    Cover the cost of operating when the land rents and taxes are so high
    Pay for the staff with minimum wages and concessions
    Pay the shareholders a dividend

    ...Importance placed on quantity not quality

    ...People conditioned to react in this way, this sort of thing didn't just happen overnight, footage of this has been played to people for the last few years and everyone is convinced that they will get a bargain, years ago they used to publish articles about what they had bought in the New Year Sales in London, that was the one big sale of the year, now we have End of Financial Year Sales, Boxing Day Sales (can't wait a few days for New Year's), Easter Sales, Summer Sales, Black Friday Sales, Cyber Monday Sales. We are being conditioned into becoming 100% consumers so we can keep this type of economy going and this is the end product of that conditioning.
     
  18. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    The reason Anarchy would not work or Libertarianism would not work is because you will have people like me around. That is going to screw with both of those systems ina big way.
     
  19. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    Did you see how many people were smiling and happy to be there? It was an event and besides a bit of jostling and basic competitive spirit, overall the people looked very restrained to me.

    In comparison, people (like me) pay money to be allowed to enter an event and go into a massive, semi-dangerous mosh pit. I've got a large scar from a particularly full-on one back in the days that the annual MFTB festival was running (Destroyer 666 had some big, crazy-arsed fans) and I still happily went back the year after.
     
  20. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    You'd be doing what precisely?
     

Share This Page