Anarchy good or bad

braintrain01 · Post by **braintrain01** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:16 pm

the definition for anarchy is
1. Absence of any form of political authority.
2. Political disorder and confusion.
3. Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

It sounds good to me no rules no responsibilities that you dont like

but it wouldn’t last for long after a wile we would form tribes like the native Americans did and we would protect each other………

to make a big change in the poweres you need anarchy look at the French revolution it used it and it kicked ass

but is it good or bad tell me but i like it

hxctimmy · Post by **hxctimmy** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:09 pm

Anarchy is retarded.

"Hey, I want your wallet full of money."
"You can't have it."
"Don't tread on my freedom. Besides, who's going to stop me? This is an individual based society. Besides, I have more guns."
"Here's my wallet."

Yeah, that's the kind of society I want to live in. Watch SLC Punk. Anarchy is worthless.

scuzzbagcomics · Post by **scuzzbagcomics** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:46 pm

Anarchy? ANARCHY??? Screw that crap! Or is it screw that cat???? Anarchy's no rules so bestiality would be free but you'd proly get scratched. Here's what I'm saying: the governemtn doesn't determine what is good or bad. They determine what is acceptable or unaccceptable for society's functioning. That's it. That's all. Don't confuse them.

hxctimmy said

Anarchy is retarded.

Or maybe you can't understand it because you are retarded. HaAAHhahH!!! HaaARR!! hArRR!!! Thoreau is considered by many to be the greatest american writer EVER!!! Let's see, he was an anarchist. I doubt retarded people can write at his caliber.

Anarchy isn't just some egotistical self-absorbed conception of how society should be run. It wasn't invented by some crooks who thought "let's make up a philosophy that will legitimize our actions." You know why? Because crooks don't know what legitimize means. Kropotkin, Proudhon, Bakunin, EDWARD ABBEY, Emerson, who else? who freakin' else? Those guys weren't retarded. They were geniuses.

Anarchism is about freedom from the corruption and oppression of a privileged few who legitimize their actions by saying "we're the government and we determine what is right and wrong." (I'm not a crook either!) Anarchy is about freedom. THE FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT. So in anarchism, everyone has freedom and no one can take away the freedom of another. Anarchism demands respect.

I would love it if everyone was responsible enough to make that kind of society happen. It would proly only work in solated communities where everyone consented to the freedom of anarchism. That would be the best society ever, and I'm sure everyone would love to live in such a perfect society.

Yeah, that's the kind of society I want to live in

See? Even hxctimmy agrees.

Watch SLC Punk. Anarchy is worthless

Any "punk" that is anti-anarchy isn't punk at all because they're anti-freedom. And freedom is the whole essence of punk. I seriously hate these conservative punks. what is the world coming to?

No, hxctimmy. You want real punk? You need to read crimethinc. "Evasion", "Days of War, Nights of Love." Evasion changed my life. No one writes like that. or check out their site www.crimethinc.com

left with only a bullet · Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:33 pm

yeah, anarchy is cool if you want to die.

hxctimmy · Post by **hxctimmy** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:42 pm

Edgar Allen Poe was a great writer even though he was insane. The ability to write well does not make one a political genius.

scuzzbagcomics · Post by **scuzzbagcomics** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:54 pm

those who write about anarchy aren't political geniuses, necessarily they're apolitical geniuses. HahAh!!! HAhHARARRA!!!!! HAhHAhARrRAr!!!!

But like I said, THOSE WHO WRITE WELL CANNOT BE RETARDED!!!

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:26 am

Just becasue someone can convey a message well, doesn't mean it is a message or truth.

Take a look at the Nazi progaganda. Give a read to our super-patroitic mission names (EX. Operation Enduring Freedom) In fact, just check out this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

scuzzbagcomics · Post by **scuzzbagcomics** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 9:59 am

no one ever said good writing is always true writing. But good writers aren't retarded and anarchism isn't propaganda. its the only legitimate and genuine political/philosophical(apolitical in its case) system which cannot be used for totalitarian purposes. It is the only system which cannot be exploited. It is the only system which cannot ever be destroyed. Communism was used to form new oppressions and now communism is dying. Anarchism will always be the hidden threat. As long as there is government, there will be anarchism.

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:32 am

IMHO Anarchism is just a stop on the way to Totalitarian-Town.

What form of economics would anarchy use?

It would only be a case of whomever is stronger gets what they want. Ergo, the wallet analogy.

IMHO: Eventually, the individuals with power would want to exert some form of control; let it be control of people, food, neccessary materials, etc. To gain control, the easiest and most effective tool is violence.

---

I see it like I view communism, a good concept, but destined to fail.

johnc · Post by **johnc** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:59 am

and just when i thought there was no hope for scuzz.
he makes a case for something other than his supreme rockness.
i guess i blame my inability to recognize internet sarcasm.
but i don't think anybody who reads crimethinc can be all bad.
i have read everything from that original collective and
some of it is pretty over the top and almost dare i say
"commercialized" for what it is. however,it makes a strong case for itself.
personally i don't subscribe to a totally anarchist society however
their ideas of personal freedoms and rights are dead on.
very inspiring, just not enough to make me stop using soap!

scuzzbagcomics · Post by **scuzzbagcomics** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:02 am

anyone who tried to exploit others isn't an anarchist, they're a oppressor. And as an oppressor, they threaten the welfare of all free citizens of the anarchist society. So the anarchists will form vigilante groups to protect each other from those fascists. fascists will be kicked out of the community. Anarchism wants a free and peace loving society.

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:04 am

So how are goods and services going to be paid for? Barter and trade?

Why work for anything except yourself in a society like that?

braintrain01 · Post by **braintrain01** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:27 pm

hxctimmy said

Anarchy is retarded.

have you ever tried to protest or ttried civil disobedience to get your way like when you were younger I bet you used it on your parents. protesting and civil disobedience are tools of anarchy

you were disagreeing with authority and you probably broke there rules and did what you wanted to do that’s called anarchy
and if anarchy is retarded does that make you retarded too....................

if disobedience is dumb and retarded was ghandi retarded

hxctimmy · Post by **hxctimmy** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:41 pm

Wanting a change in the government and wanting it to cease to exist are two different things. The fact that's I've been part of pro-life chains does not make me an anarchist. I still believe the government needs to exercise change there.

fragile_funk · Post by **fragile_funk** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:16 pm

sharkmansix wrote: So how are goods and services going to be paid for? Barter and trade?

Why work for anything except yourself in a society like that

Heck yeah, I have always wished we could go back to a system of bartering, like in the good ol' days.

I'll give you one of my rabbit skins for a basket of corn...

FortWayneMusic.com

Anarchy good or bad

is anarchy good or bad

Anarchy good or bad