1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettHave you read the Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy? The Martians eventually adopt a similar system to what you have suggested, but it takes two centuries, the extremely harsh conditions of the early years, decades of oppressive rule by enormous Terran corporations, each with armies of 'security personnel', and a technology which gives people life expectancies of 200+ (meaning that some of the original colonists are still alive by the end!) in order to achieve it.
Despite whatever your so called unions have said, South Africa is, and has always been (since European settlement), a capitalist society. Your "revolution" merely swept the embarrassment of apartheid out the door. It has never challenged ...[text shortened]... Stalinist era. Anarchists reject the role of the vanguard party.
The society you refer to would certainly be nice, if you could get it to work on a large scale (existing communes are quite different because they self-select those who are most willing to participate.) My opinion is that we have not yet reached a stage where such a society will emerge spontaneously because people want it to happen, and if an idealistic minority try to forcefully impose it they are sure to fail.
Originally posted by rwingettYea... I'm so naive i can't stand it. I believe everything is see and hear. Give me a break. Read your own posts. You are the one who says that "there will be no private ownership" and that the orange grove will be owned by the Community. "Community"... "Commune"... " "Commun-ism"... get it? As it stands, your philosophy of sophistry still requires an elite ruling class (wringlett and his buddies) and their secret killers.... (any volunteers?) You just need to stop believeing everything you hear at your meetings and start seeing the world as it is. Worn out commies by anyother name are still not roses. Just worn out commies.
You have no idea what communism, or anarchism even is, except what you have been spoon fed by the capitalist controlled media. What you are histrionically ranting on about is a Soviet style, Stalinist system, which, as you correctly point out, has little relevance to today's world. I detest Stalinism just as much as you. But I do so for different reasons. ...[text shortened]... ings? Capitalism has played its role in history, but its time has passed. It is time to move on.
As for knowing what anarchy is... It is simply the lack of law and the mechanisms to enforce such upon the masses. Again... nice try, but it will never happen. If it does... i'm so naive ... you feel free to come to me and i'll do my best to protect you. I doubt you can do it yourselves. Read history and you will see that you and your buddies are always the first to be butchered by the very dictator you are fighting for.
You are right... No true marxist state has ever existed. I am right. One never will. We're both right. How about that? Your commie system WILL ALWAYS REQUIRE A SECRET POLICE. IT'S BUILT INTO THE SYSTEM.
As for you speaking about "the workers" ... until you have actually done a little physical work, (try framing just 1 house... 8 tones of material moved 7 miles by six people in 10 hour) you are not qualified to talk about it. you think?
Originally posted by AcolyteYes, I have laid on the revolutionary sloganeering quite thickly in this thread. I realize that tactic was bound to alienate a few readers, but that was the point of view I have chosen to argue here. Everybody seems to have an opinion about anarchism, Marxism, and communism, but very few people actually know anything about the topic. I just try to get people to look at some of their long held beliefs from a different perspective. Plus I enjoy writing these kind of posts. I mean, how often do you get the opportunity to use terms like "wage slavery" in everyday conversation?
Your posts aren't completely silly, though they are a little reminiscent of "four legs good, two legs bad" from 'Animal Farm'. The current system certainly has its problems, but given your extreme attitude, are you living in an anarcho-syndicalist commune, and if not, why not?
As for living on an anarcho-syndicalist commune, I lived at the East Wind Community in southern Missouri for nearly a year at one time. While they do not refer to themselves as being "anarcho-syndicalist", they do conform to most of the ideals of anarcho-syndicalism.
Saying that I live in an anarcho-syndicalist commune always makes me think of the scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, where King Aurthur is arguing with the peasants digging in the mud (if you've seen the movie, then you know the scene I'm talking about).
Originally posted by rwingettAh right. I tend to simply assume someone is being serious, and then mention the bits where I can think of good counter-arguments (playing devil's advocate). I have 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail' on DVD, and that's what made me think of the phrase. 😀 Never mind the revolutionary left, what's happened to the moderate left, the centre and even the moderate right in the US? 😕
Yes, I have laid on the revolutionary sloganeering quite thickly in this thread. I realize that tactic was bound to alienate a few readers, but that was the point of view I have chosen to argue here. Everybody seems to have an opinion about anarchism, Marxism, and communism, but very few people actually know anything about the topic. I just try to get peopl ...[text shortened]... ants digging in the mud (if you've seen the movie, then you know the scene I'm talking about).
Originally posted by rwingettThanks for the tip. I really will look into this. 🙂
You should look into the East Wind Community, and the Federation of Egalitarian Communities that I mentioned earlier in this thread. East Wind is a community of about 70 people living on 1045 acres of land in the scenic Missouri Ozarks. A decent and fairly stress free life out in the woods is exactly what they have established. You could live a fully human ...[text shortened]... ://www.eastwind.org/index.html/
Federation of Egalitarian Communities: http://www.thefec.org/
Originally posted by StarValleyWyunforunately true, dicatorships due require an armed force like hilter's SS,
Yea... I'm so naive i can't stand it. I believe everything is see and hear. Give me a break. Read your own posts. You are the one who says that "there will be no private ownership" and that the orange grove will be owned by the Community. "Community"... "Commune"... " "Commun-ism"... get it? As it stands, your philosophy of sophistry still r ...[text shortened]... erial moved 7 miles by six people in 10 hour) you are not qualified to talk about it. you think?
well thank god we live in a democracy, with the MI6 MI5 CIA FBI and AFT. not as extreme but we still have them.
so we have never had and never will have a true marxist state, but then we have never had a true democracy either, and we never will have,
Originally posted by belgianfreak/agree
Plus, if you take away all the control systems, they would just start again. It'd just revert to the strongest gang makes the rules, and these rules wouldn't be anywhere near as fair.
Does the fact that you ant to do good to your fellow man not show that you have been brought up in a society that promotes this way of thinking? In an anarchistic society I'm sure this idealism would disolve quickly
Originally posted by magnublmI would be interested in hearing why you agree.
/agree
Personally, I have long held that a mans character has much more to do with personal choices than pressure from the world around them. It is my belief that a persons integrity is of their own choosing and while that individuals surroundings may put pressure upon them to swing one way or another, ultimately the choice and accountability rests upon the individual (I hope that makes sense🙄).
What are your thoughts? 🙂
Most laws about relating to your fellow man come from the god or gods the lawmakers *erm* (I'm not sure how to say this) 'adhere' to, isn't it?
These basic 'moral' rules ie. don't kill your neighbour to get to his wife etc. etc.
I don't really know to much about anarchists etc. Would there still be christians, muslims or whatever in an anarchist society?
If not, I can't see them loving their neighbours like rwingett said earlier, because no laws and punishment will mean there is no crime.
Originally posted by CrowleyThere tends to be a high correlation between anarchism and atheism, but they do not necessarily go hand in hand.
Most laws about relating to your fellow man come from the god or gods the lawmakers *erm* (I'm not sure how to say this) 'adhere' to, isn't it?
These basic 'moral' rules ie. don't kill your neighbour to get to his wife etc. etc.
I don't really know to much about anarchists etc. Would there still be christians, muslims or whatever in an anarchist so ...[text shortened]... ighbours like rwingett said earlier, because no laws and punishment will mean there is no crime.
Originally posted by rwingettI'm an atheist myself but the laws of 'government/god' do protect me from getting killed, raped, stolen from (kinda, although I believe laws only really keep the honest people honest and punishes the criminals). Will these basic moral rules be adhered to in an global anarchistic society? Or will a lot more honest people turn against each other, seeing as it will be easier to do?
There tends to be a high correlation between anarchism and atheism, but they do not necessarily go hand in hand.
Originally posted by OmnislashI believe that you are right, that on a smaller scale a person choses his character, but I think on the larger scale he only usually choses from inside the box that his society provides. This is shown around the world and through history, that what is concodered right, good & normal is dictated by the society and the people in it, being brought up that way, also believe it to be right. The society you grow up in gives you the perspective you view the world from, and it is from that angle that you decide what you think is right & wrong. I don't think we chose our own path as much as you suggest
I would be interested in hearing why you agree.
Personally, I have long held that a mans character has much more to do with personal choices than pressure from the world around them. It is my belief that a persons integrity is of their own choosing and while that individuals surroundings may put pressure upon them to swing one way or another, ultimatel ...[text shortened]... untability rests upon the individual (I hope that makes sense🙄).
What are your thoughts? 🙂