quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
>>>>If that happened then the whole of the system will have failed.<<<<

It will. Give up now.

>>>> If society stands back and watches the whole of the system that they have fought, killed, seen loved ones die for, be destroyed<<<<<

20 years after your glorious revolution, no one will remember it, and wont care. The only combat they could see to defend it would turn into the same armies they tried to replace.

>>>>then, and only then will I say that Anarchism cannot work.<<<<

So youre saying, when a population stops caring about things they once fought for, that is proof anarchy doesnt work?

The Republic of Rome. The original American Constitution. The Indus Valley Empire. The dynasties of China. The Soviets. Fascist Italy.

I can go on...for hours. You lose.

---

uh oh we lose. oh wait not one person fought for the american constitution, it was writen 6 years after the revolutionary war started. the republic of rome was founded on slaughter. italy didn't 'stop caring' about fascism, they got whuped. but really your point is not illustrated at all by any of your examples axcept possibly the soviets. on top of that you seem to put your faith in this capitalist system we have now despite the fact that that the only thing it works for is competition. yes capitalism can out compete everyone. all you social darwinists should be oh so happy that you were 'right' now wait til you get hurt and cant work, cant afford food or a place to stay. cant compete. then lets see how much you like capitalism.

unless you're in a coma, you will always have the ability to compete.

>>>>>>uh oh we lose. oh wait not one person fought for the american constitution, it was writen 6 years after the revolutionary war started.<<<<

A war that was fought for ideas and dreams that were given concrete form in our Constitution.

>>>> the republic of rome was founded on slaughter.<<<<

What the fuck does that have anything to do with the fact that though it was fought for, (Or admittedly, people slaughtered for it), it was allowed to die with little resistance.

>>>>> italy didn't 'stop caring' about fascism, they got whuped.<<<<

you must not know anything about Fascist Italy. Its understandable. Italians deserted in droves, generals surrendered without firing a shot, and generals deposed the Duce out of fear of the advancing allies. It was not long before that that they were fighting to create a Fascist state.

>>>> but really your point is not illustrated at all by any of your examples axcept possibly the soviets.<<<<<

Even one example suffices. Isnt that what you said you needed to see you were wrong?

>>>>> on top of that you seem to put your faith in this capitalist system we have now despite the fact that that the only thing it works for is competition.<<<<<

I do?

>>>>> yes capitalism can out compete everyone. <<<<<

Not really. Without some tiny errors, a whole lot of forms would vanquish Capitalism if they had a fair start. if there was an industrialized monarchy somewhere, a Papal modern nation, or a Fascist state, it could easily compete with capitalism. China does.

>>>> now wait til you get hurt and cant work, cant afford food or a place to stay. cant compete. then lets see how much you like capitalism.<<<<<

Capitalism, at least in civilized countries I know of, doesnt leave you to rot like an eskimo with bad teeth if you cant work. What are you talking about?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lazy Bastard:
"one commune can't transport it's product to another - isn't good."

I don't see how anarchism stops "products" from being transported.

---

The context was: Your suggestion to banish the criminal element to live outside the commune's walls. So when the truck leaves the commune (laden with the fruits of the commune; destined for trade with another commune; whereupon needed goods will be loaded in turn); the criminal element will most likely hijack it - thereby restricting commerce.

quote:

---

"Leave the capitalist system"

How? I don't think the police will take "I've decided not to take part in the Capitalist system", as an excuse to why I've got 15 Cannabis Plants in my attic (Not that I have or anything......)

---

And if cultivating weed goes agin the commune's laws... the communal cops are not likely to condone it either - That was my point. If a commune is just a miniature country, of like-minded individuals, then it's really similar to a country, in a global community isn't it? Cultivation may be illegal in the UK, but it's not in every country.

quote:

---

The point of Anarchism is to create a society where it is virtually impossible for people to become powerful

---

That's called Fascism.

Your brand of anarchy is just utopianism. It rejects the regulation of a large government, while hypocritically recognizing the need for communal law, and completely ignoring man's nature regarding societal behavoir. It's really just a hippie-fied, municipal version of socialism.

In order for it to work, it would have to depend on violence - as a means to control power. Like-minded individuals; exerting their will with force.

quote:

---

I suppose that means I won't be replying to this thread any longer.

---

Whaaa.

>>>>The point of Anarchism is to create a society where it is virtually impossible for people to become powerful
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's called Fascism.<<<


What?

With the exception of decentralized government, it would be fascism. For a commune to work, all of it's members would have similar goals and desires. They would have to be like-minded or nothing would be accomplished. Communes would be organized along racial and religious lines. They would have to enforce their policies w/ force. There's many similarities, authoritarianism is just the icing-on-the-cake... if you like that sort of thing. lol.

What is the point of overthrowing a large centralized government in favor of a smaller one, where a citizen is more comfortable with it's civic law? You're not likely to join a commune with your neighbor are you? No, you'll seek out your friends first, and then others like them. Communes will be formed along philosophical lines, not democratic, or geographical ones. It wouldn't work any other way.

Hey, where's my reply? You always skate on this shit.

Kenny Lofton can kiss my ass, so can BENITO Santiago.

first off...just hear what i got to say i think you all had a few things left out when u heard about anarchy..anarchy is not about all gone wild running around killing and getting what you wish. it is orginzed. it is about how the govt. is slowly cheating us out of our rights as americans(for thouse who live here) and how we cant do as much as we used to. I mean for the love of god all ages have to be off the street by what ever time. america has gone to hell. yeah sure we got advanced and all but look what it got us. nothing. anarchy means much more than u know its a way of thinking not a so called "religon" as you are stating it to be. I belive that in a few years america wont be the land of the free. Im not dissing america all the way now...i have to give it so props...we can hold our ground when ush comes to shove. we have such a varity of items it can make ur head spin. living in america is an easy life compaired to some other countries but it is still controlling. we have so many rules that attach to the bill of rights its not even a laughing matter. well im gonna cut it short so sorry its late

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gwarth666:
it is about how the govt. is slowly cheating us out of our rights as americans(for thouse who live here) and how we cant do as much as we used to.

---

Two things:

1. What dictionary did this definition of anarchy come from?

2. Use of the shift key to form capital letters when required is a highly commendable action here at Totse.


BTW...welcome.

Nox

quote:

---

Originally posted by user X:
With the exception of decentralized government, it would be fascism. For a commune to work, all of it's members would have similar goals and desires. They would have to be like-minded or nothing would be accomplished. Communes would be organized along racial and religious lines. They would have to enforce their policies w/ force. There's many similarities, authoritarianism is just the icing-on-the-cake... if you like that sort of thing. lol.

What is the point of overthrowing a large centralized government in favor of a smaller one, where a citizen is more comfortable with it's civic law? You're not likely to join a commune with your neighbor are you? No, you'll seek out your friends first, and then others like them. Communes will be formed along philosophical lines, not democratic, or geographical ones. It wouldn't work any other way.

---

how is that fascism?

The classic definition - fascist movements of 1920's Europe.

People with common blood, religion, morals and fetishes for polished black leather - dismissing the need for democracy, because they all thought alike to begin with.

anarchy is a grand idea and can be supported if we can stand up and alert the masses of its true potential.

i belive that capitolism is wrong and immorral. it takes a societies people and turns them into dollar signs.... we are taken and used untill we die, and then the corporations find some other willing replacement for us... god save us from capitolism...(forgive me for the implication that there is a god)

Its only there because you keep on buying the shit it sells you.

Capitalism isn't awful, it's beatiful.

It takes one of humanity's basest instincts, greed, and uses this to achieve a self-regulating state of perfect efficiency.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FuckOffandDie:
What happens when my commune decides to take over your commune?

---

Exactly. Human nature would eventually take hold and one man or a group of men would crave more power. These men would eventually take over these anarchists, it has happened over and over again throughout time. Whenever there is a state of Anarchy, someone rises up and takes power, no matter what. Anarchy will only exist in punk music and on homeless herion junkies' T-shirts.

I agree.

Nox

people need to learn to work together, not use others just to further thier own career and whatnot. if we can learn to do that, then anarchy will work. the only reson it may not work is because people wont belive in it, if they did, it would work. its all up to each person.

Okay. Let's say we've got a bunch of people who want to work for the good of the group. Let's put them in a system with no leadership.

What they can do is limited, because they have noone telling them what to do, so they have no cohesion of action.

you have a good point, but if the people come together to make decisions, the need of a leader is no longer present, therfore there is nobody in position of power because all have equal power

True, but people being what they are, the alpha personality will always arise and control the group.

Nox

They couldn't make decisions. It takes a leader to focus and direct things.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
>>>>>>uh oh we lose. oh wait not one person fought for the american constitution, it was writen 6 years after the revolutionary war started.<<<<

A war that was fought for ideas and dreams that were given concrete form in our Constitution.

---

no, we fought a war to free our selves from england, then our elite wrote a constitution, one of the firsst constitutions i might add, based on the enlightenment.

quote:

---

>>>> the republic of rome was founded on slaughter.<<<<

What the fuck does that have anything to do with the fact that though it was fought for, (Or admittedly, people slaughtered for it), it was allowed to die with little resistance.

---

little resistance? they fought off the huns for quite some time, and were around for 600 years or so.

quote:

---

>>>>> italy didn't 'stop caring' about fascism, they got whuped.<<<<

you must not know anything about Fascist Italy. Its understandable. Italians deserted in droves, generals surrendered without firing a shot, and generals deposed the Duce out of fear of the advancing allies. It was not long before that that they were fighting to create a Fascist state.

---

so they got scared, not much difference between that and getting whupped. plus they realized that there wasn't to much diffference between capitalist democracies and fascist states.

quote:

---

>>>> but really your point is not illustrated at all by any of your examples axcept possibly the soviets.<<<<<

Even one example suffices. Isnt that what you said you needed to see you were wrong?

---

first off, the soviets were imposed on people anarchism would not be. second why does one example suffice? if there are many systems that have not been destroyed by apathy then that means the possibility exists that people might accually care about thier ideals.

quote:

---

>>>>> on top of that you seem to put your faith in this capitalist system we have now despite the fact that that the only thing it works for is competition.<<<<<

I do?

---

sorry cheap shot.

quote:

---

>>>>> yes capitalism can out compete everyone. <<<<<

Not really. Without some tiny errors, a whole lot of forms would vanquish Capitalism if they had a fair start. if there was an industrialized monarchy somewhere, a Papal modern nation, or a Fascist state, it could easily compete with capitalism. China does.

---

capitalism is based on the ideal of competition. when i say it out competes i mean it takes over, we wont see industrialized monarchies breaking out all over the world.

quote:

---

>>>> now wait til you get hurt and cant work, cant afford food or a place to stay. cant compete. then lets see how much you like capitalism.<<<<<

Capitalism, at least in civilized countries I know of, doesnt leave you to rot like an eskimo with bad teeth if you cant work. What are you talking about?

---

you mean socialism. haven't you seen a homeless person? nope none of them in the US. and if there are they're aall druggies right.

At the end of the day, you guys who oppose the current system, should know that yes, capitalism is a bad thing, but only becaus eof the ethics of those who run it.

If the system stayed the same, but the ethics and morals changed, would it be such a bad system after all?

Modern China is mostly Capitalist, economically.

ANARCHY WILL NEVER WORK!!!!!!
NEVER!!!
There must be an establishment, or people will die needlessly.
Every anarchial state has always gained some kind of order, warped or no, look at third world prisons.
You are all idiots.
The only reason you want anarchy is because you are all a bunch of poor, useless 35 year olds living in your parent's basement and refering to it as your "fortress of solitude."
With anarchy, you idiots would have a chance to get off your paper routes and to get a damn life, maybe even kiss a girl.
Losers.

[/QUOTE]
no, we fought a war to free our selves from england, then our elite wrote a constitution, one of the firsst constitutions i might add, based on the enlightenment.

quote:

---

The we you are referring to, because of a combination of greed, laziness, treason, and apathy, handed their power over to millions of people not their descendents, to enforce and defend a system alien to their own. Our constitution has little in common with the original in terms of its application.

---

little resistance? they fought off the huns for quite some time, and were around for 600 years or so.

quote:

---

The Huns invaded long after the Republic was dead and Caesars had control. By the time of the Civil wars that spelled the official end of the Republic, the Rome legions had fought for was a long dead, seething, corrupt machine of profit.

---

so they got scared, not much difference between that and getting whupped. plus they realized that there wasn't to much diffference between capitalist democracies and fascist states.

quote:

---

And only 15-20 years after fighting to establish a new system. So they surrendered it.

---

first off, the soviets were imposed on people anarchism would not be.

quote:

---

LoL. So the whole world is going to want to tear down their nations?

---

capitalism is based on the ideal of competition. when i say it out competes i mean it takes over, we wont see industrialized monarchies breaking out all over the world.

quote:

---

I know, but only because they were killed by the time of industrialization. My point is, it is not Capitalism's virtues that make it dominant today, it's its monopoly.

---

you mean socialism. haven't you seen a homeless person? nope none of them in the US. and if there are they're aall druggies right.[/B][/QUOTE]

Wouldnt a better question be, havent you ever seen a guy who doesnt work? You said if you cant work you become a hopeless homeless victim. I dont work. A lot of my friends dont. I know plenty of adults who do not. They are all well-fed and warm at night in a bed.

Damn. My first experimentation in quoting went horribly backwards. LoL. See if you can figure that one out.

Oh man, lol

Ok, I worked out the kinks on the Bad Ideas Forum, but to correct this error I will go old school.

>>>>>no, we fought a war to free our selves from england, then our elite wrote a constitution, one of the firsst constitutions i might add, based on the enlightenment.<<<<<

The we you are referring to, because of a combination of greed, laziness, treason, and apathy, handed their power over to millions of people not their descendents, to enforce and defend a system alien to their own. Our constitution has little in common with the original in terms of its application.

>>>>little resistance (from the Roman republic)? they fought off the huns for quite some time, and were around for 600 years or so.<<<<

The Huns invaded long after the Republic was dead and Caesars had control. By the time of the Civil wars that spelled the official end of the Republic, the Rome legions had fought for was a long dead, seething, corrupt machine of profit.

>>>>so they (treacherous Fascist posers in Italy) got scared, not much difference between that and getting whupped. plus they realized that there wasn't to much diffference between capitalist democracies and fascist states.<<<<<<

And only 15-20 years after fighting to establish a new system. So they surrendered it. Once the fight got serious they thought, Fuck it.

>>>>first off, the soviets were imposed on people anarchism would not be.<<<<

LoL. So the whole world is going to want to tear down their nations?

>>>>capitalism is based on the ideal of competition. when i say it out competes i mean it takes over, we wont see industrialized monarchies breaking out all over the world.<<<<

I know, but only because they were killed by the time of industrialization. My point is, it is not Capitalism's virtues that make it dominant today, it's its monopoly.

>>>>you mean socialism. haven't you seen a homeless person? nope none of them in the US. and if there are they're aall druggies right<<<<<

Wouldnt a better question be, havent you ever seen a guy who doesnt work? You said if you cant work you become a hopeless homeless victim. I dont work. A lot of my friends dont. I know plenty of adults who do not. They are all well-fed and warm at night in a bed.
And there are homeless people in Socialist states too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by preying mantis:
At the end of the day, you guys who oppose the current system, should know that yes, capitalism is a bad thing, but only becaus eof the ethics of those who run it.

If the system stayed the same, but the ethics and morals changed, would it be such a bad system after all?

---

the ethics and morals wont change, thats the point. people do bad things. In an anarchist society they would not have the power to fuck people over on a large scale.

what was the point of all of this spirit?

What is the point in this question?
There is no precedence in the feasibility of an anarchial system, it just would never work.
If you can show me one example of a state or system that worked without rules, then I will convert from a die-hard capitalist to a die-hard anarchist.
However, there is no example of that, so I will continue being what you all hate.

And another thing---------------------------
You all talk of utopia, but I must point out that the only experiment where someone tried to create a world-wide utopia ended very badly sometime in the 40s....

This is kinda of topic, but i just relised where the massive swarm of new members is coming from! a friend recomened this site to me and i decided to join after seeing what it was about. then when i started this topic, my friend all4anarchy went and told my whole damn school!!!!! if u notice there are alot of new people posting on this thred i probly know them. sry about the sudden flood of dumbasses. ill tell them to shut the hell up unless they have somthing intellegent to say.
But as long as im here i might as well say that ive learned alot from you discusion and have reformed MY ideals. i still belive anacrhy is possible if EVERYONE could put up with it, and maybe a benevlolent dictator could be the best plan of action.

-ShadowFist

there is one very good example of a system that is run by anachy, and that is the internet...

And we have people spamming bulletin boards and the like.

Anarchy could work, but it could go terribly bad also. For anarchy to work and cause no war and stuff like that you have to have people work together and i cant think of one person who can get along with everyone in the united states, I know i couldnt. Until we can work together anarchy would never work because people would mistake the idea of it and just start going crazy, cause only a few people know what anarchy is all about and how it would work. I dont know what anarchy is all about but overall i feel it would fail in a place like USA were people are so mean to eachother and so critical to other opinions.

If anarchy really worked, there would be no anythingelsearchy.

You'll see the differnce between reasonable people and so-called "anarchists" 10 to 20 years from now.

While the sound-minded will have jobs, cars, and maybe houses, the "anarchists" will have shit. If you dont end up in prison, you are lucky. You will be collecting your welfare check and EBT card until we take it away from you.

Just get a clue before its too late.

And how about these communist idiots protesting in Washington D.C.? What a pack of morons. They want free housing, free food, and free money. Thing is that they won't build a house even if you give them wood, tools, and land (which won't happen, ya bums). Work for yourself you food stamp, welfare bums!!!

Anarchy will never work. id rather have fun playin cat and mouse against pigs. as soon as anarchy occurs, someone would try to assume power. how do i know this is true? I would try to assume power. anarchy is the rejection of all ordered systems. this makes no sense. are you all going to agree to have an anarchy? heh...no...it just fuckin happens...you want anarchy, move to haiti motherfucker. otherwise, just keep raisin hell like the rest of us.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lazy Bastard:
The ruling class are the small group of people that hold most of the power within society.

Are you disputing the fact that there exists a small group of people, that hold power within a capitalist society?

Are you seriously saying that a person living in poverty, just earning enough to survive has the same amount of power as the Chairman of a large multi-national corporation?

---

whoever has the best aim has the most power out of the two...

dont you understand that there are more important things than cars and houses and matierial crap.... i would rather not have a damn thing exept for the clothes on my back and be free and happy, than locked in a prison for my mind, and have everything in the world

excuse this i didn't read the rest of the thread.


[This message has been edited by farwah (edited 10-23-2002).]

O! i don't think anarchy necessarily has to be no system, its just a rebellion against the current system,
doesn't mean a return to our "primitive" state of no society. just a new kinda system is all anarchy is in my mind.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bogey Man:
What power are you talking about?

They both have the right to be educated and make money, some negated the possibility at a young age through lack of motivation, or the few that were unable to rise above certain family situations and etc.

Everyone has the right to vote.

---

hahahhaha ... oooo thats funny!

quote:

---

Originally posted by zeroninjax:
dont you understand that there are more important things than cars and houses and matierial crap.... i would rather not have a damn thing exept for the clothes on my back and be free and happy, than locked in a prison for my mind, and have everything in the world

---

I am just making the point that anarchy is an idealist load of idiocy. Saying "anarchy will never happen" is validating the ideas of anarchists as legitimate viewpoints. You people are so stupid.

BTW, are you in 7th grade or did you fail?