I’ve only recently taken an interest in better learning what anarchism really is as a political/social/economic idea.
To be honest, much like communism, democracy, and federalism, the idea is very good in theory, but naturally harbors some flaws and potential problems.
Still, it is an interesting idea. If the right people were active in an anarchist country, it could be one of the most prosperous.
By the way, if you believe that anarchism is merely chaos and an every-man-for-themselves idea, then you are an idiot.
Anarchism itself is more or less the demolition of the idea of a state and moves onto an individualistic, yet communal, organization of the people. In fact, direct democracy and capitalism (although, not in it’s modern application) fit quite nicely in anarchist establishments, at least in their theoretical and ideal implementations.
I like anarchy in the way the Venus Project uses it. It’s pretty hard to explain though, and the human race itself would need a true change of consciousness to work for the human race rather than going at eachother’s necks for profit.
ramunematt wrote:
I like anarchy in the way the Venus Project uses it. It’s pretty hard to explain though, and the human race itself would need a true change of consciousness to work for the human race rather than going at eachother’s necks for profit.
Yeah, I think if our current society ever went anarchist, it would be a bad thing.
It would have to be a slower process.
But anarchy itself is not bad. I think, although I’d have to look it up, that ancient Athens was anarchist in a sense, where there wasn’t a supreme leader of the people, and they used direct democracy to run everything through social forums. Granted, you need people with sense to do that, and they shouldn’t be so dispersed, or so populated.
But the concern of someone trying to gain power is a valid one.
Read This If Your Mom Sucked My Dick wrote:
anarchy doesn’t work in the long run people are just going to take over each other creating a government run state.
Well, that depends. As long as the collective “hive mind” of the leaderless anarchists remains united and they have enough numbers I think they could be able to deal with any organised groups that would be trying to take the place over because one of the advantages would be that they are more adaptable as a collective than an organized group which makes up for them being less organised.
Read This If Your Mom Sucked My Dick wrote:
anarchy doesn’t work in the long run people are just going to take over each other creating a government run state.
Actually it would work better in the long run than what we have now. Today the main incentive is profit which leads to greed, abuse of power, and disregard for human life in order to save a few bucks... have you ever wondered how your shoes and clothes were made? They are made in third world countries by kids working in sweatshops for 10 cents a day, because it’s a lot cheaper than producing them here in factories.
Read This If Your Mom Sucked My Dick wrote:
anarchy doesn’t work in the long run people are just going to take over each other creating a government run state.
Actually it would work better in the long run than what we have now. Today the main incentive is profit which leads to greed, abuse of power, and disregard for human life in order to save a few bucks... have you ever wondered how your shoes and clothes were made? They are made in third world countries by kids working in sweatshops for 10 cents a day, because it’s a lot cheaper than producing them here in factories.
No at first it might seem good because everyone is independent but then idealists and people who support states or maybe just greedy people are going to start attacking other people and it would be complete chaos not to mention it would be difficult to organize any form of defense if its every man for himself with no leader to guide them.
