Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Kids with guns - locked and loaded

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by ungovernable, Jul 14, 2010.

  1. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    vAsSiLy77

    Thanks man. I appreciate that. I am very uneducated on anarchy as a working "system." I admit that most of my theory has come from my vague knowledge of the topic and mostly my philosophy on human nature, which is quite bleak if you didn't notice. I think I am misunderstood for the most part. If people are willing to listen I would like to post my theory completely thought out. Of course well on down the line. I get fired up when people call me stupid, especially when we are arguing the same topic with different views, and it annoys me when people resort to personal attack. I want to know more. I want to further my theory. I am in school right now and I really think i could become a professor and I want to know anarchy inside and out, yes I am young and vastly ignorant on the topics that come up, but I have opinions and I can usually back them up.

    Anyways, thank you for being patient with my theory unlike Ungovernable, he has a right to be mad and tell me I wrong, but not to insult me and call me every thing I hate. I am mislead/ I have a different approach to things. Don't call me stupid, educate me.
     
  2. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    And without any due respect fuck you, you stupid childish imbecile. What you advocate isn't Individualistic Anarchism, its called Satanism emphasis on complete selfishness. 'Bout a fuckin moron is all you are....I'm an Anarchist dude.. :ecouteurs:
     
  3. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    Radicalvoice89,
    - don't mention, I'm just trying to get this Anarchy thing working, and mostly I do it on my behalf first - 'cause I/we will need you when the time for the real change arises... and it will be important that everyone of us is able to decide for him/herself what to do - and with the common knowledge of the basics it will be a lot easier.
    I don't call you stupid, 'cause you aren't, your really brave admission of lacking the knowledge is the best proof for your intelligence and I really appreciate that.

    It's always a good idea to become a professor, the more you know the more you are able to give to your surrounding and the more you will receive from it - mutual help again...
    From my point of view I would recommend to read Bakunin and Kropotkin, both are quite good in the basics of the philosophy and the historical differences between them and Karl Marx/the later bolshevics in Russia are very important to realize the true nature of Anarchy.
    Take your time and think about the stuff, try to relate it with your HERE AND NOW and use this site to ask questions and discuss it - there are many comrades here...
    For your view on human nature some science about prehistoric societies or so called "nature"-societies might help, I don't want to push primitivism but it's a good way to understand "our" true nature and abilities (and the kind of deady barbarism we have to suffer today). It's hard to recommend something in particular 'cause I live in germoney but years ago it helped me a lot to find out what's wrong around me.

    The idea to post your theorie is a good one - if you are able to face the criticism...
    Sometimes it's a bit rough on sites like this, a bit boring too to see people resort to personal attack instead of discussing and a bit frustrating 'cause nothing is achieved - just do your part and try to keep your response on the matter and pay the necessary basic respect - words don't really hurt unless you let them hurt you.
    Further the cause!
     
  4. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
  5. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    vAsSiLy77

    I've been to Germany a few times, and I fucking love it. It is a beautiful country and yes the politics suck and I know very little about them, but what I will say is that, from my experience most of Europe is much more progressive than the United States. I mean that is not really an experience, more of a fact, but still. Anyways, yeah I thought the internet was something that would be more open to a real debate rather than taking what someone says, and berating them for having said it. Oh well, I don't need to prove anything to anyone on this site. I'll take the criticism as long is has evidence and logic behind it and use it to fight back. If someone is critical of my work than so be it. I know what I think and they don't need to accept it either.

    As to Punkmar77, whatever man. Yeah, I am selfish. But to me, its pragmatical. I don't need to prove myself to you. I don't know you're real name, nor do I want to, you're opinion says something, (that I actually have to know my shit), but other than that...
    Call me what you will but I may have stumbled on the wrong site, I don't agree with anarchist communism. If that is what this site is about... then I made a mistake.
     
  6. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Berating people is not really my thing, and I probably just reacted to your disrespectful post, and no Anarcho-Communism isn't what this site is only about but it is a large part of what anarchism is about. If being selfish is what you are about then maybe you don't belong here, but that's entirely up to you unless you break this sites collective charter. Vassily77 is only saying and doing with you what we have tried to do with hundreds of self styled anarchists that have been here. Some get over themselves and actually learn something and others move on when they realize this isn't for them. No of course you don't have to prove yourself to me, other than you can be a member of this sites community without being disrespectful to others and statements like this....

    and...
    are very disrespectful.
     
  7. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Fuck, again talk about guns and gun control makes all the US folks go bat shit. o_O

    It may be worth noting that countries that have strong gun control laws have less gun deaths. I have no problem saying that there should be restrictions placed on tools that exist only to kill people, this I do not feel undermines my anarchism. Rather the question would be on the most appropriate means for regulating guns: ie the State or community control? The latter obviously.

    'Human nature' is fundamentally a subjective topic, one's theory can not be proven/disproven, this is because it ignores the fact that we are social beings. The obvious case is the language you speak depends on where yr born, what yr parents speak, etc. It follows that selfishness as 'human nature' is just as problematic, could it not be a consequence of Capitalism and hierarchical society? This question can't actually be answered either way, it is therefore a moot point. We're both a creation of, and interactive with, the socio-cultural, economic and political circumstances we live in.

    BTW statements such as this:
    again ignore social factors.
    Unless you run to the hills and live a self-sufficient isolationist existence, your freedom is tied up with others'.
    Doing 'what you want' within society amounts to little more than selfishness and a failure to take responsibility for your obligations to others or deal with the consequences of yr actions. Think of the number of ppl needed for you to do something as simple as post comments on this forum, the ability to write, the evolution of the english language, the interwebz, the comrades who moderate and maintain this forum, etc, etc...

    Yr assertion that anarchy is only about you is farcical, anarchy is about social freedom, this includes the direct democratic control of all wealth (as all wealth is social), solidarity and mutual aid. Concerns limited to only your freedom are better described as Liberalism, the ideology of the Bourgeoisie.

    If you are serious about learning more about anarchism, I would suggest you re-examine your position on 'worrying about overs'.
     
  8. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Ok sorry for saying there is no hope with you, i see that you realize you are mistaken and you are willing to learn.

    But don't blame me for insulting you, you are the one who started calling me a fake anarchist and telling me "fuck you" when i was only trying to explain you are wrong. And i DID bring arguments to explain you why you were wrong. Sorry but you are the one who "resort to personal attack"

    If you want to learn about anarchism, i suggest by not starting with max stirner egoist anarchist bullshit, or at least don't take it as the official anarchist doctrine. I'm not 100% against individualism but you must make a big synthesis of what you read and don't build your anarchist ideas only around individualist theories.


    Why do you only critize me and not him for tellimg me to fuck off and other insults ? I did discuss and try to explain him, even after i was attacked and insulted....

    Yes, most of our ideas can be represented by Anarcho-communism. But not only to anarcho-communism. The main fact is that anarcho-punk mainly recognize itself in the anarcho-collectivist tendency which anarcho-communism is part of. Didn't you notice the Equality logo in our banner ? Individualism is not equality, anarcho-communism is.

    You just admitted you don't understand anarchism, so learn about anarcho-communism before saying it is bullshit. Drop max stirner to the trash and start reading Petr Kropotkin. Not only because Petr Kropotkin is an important theorician of anarcho-communism, but also because you might learn what mutual aid is and how important it is.

    +1

    By thinking and caring only about yourself you definatly aren't going forward to anarchism. Caring about others is like the basis principle
     
  9. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    (wonder, wonder, wonder - it looks like WE DID IT - so my thanx to everyone involved...)

    RadicalVoice89,
    my initial expectations in the internets were much the same like yours, but now I think I was a bit too naiv about that - the net is only a mirror of real life - so you can always expect everything, but you'll have to realize...
    You have to get over yourself (Punkmar77) to find what you're searching for. Sad but true: Take it or leave it.

    Punkmar also quoted that he and the others running this site had/have to deal with "hundreds of self styled anarchists" - and I can only assume how frustrating it is to answer the same questions again and again, hundreds of times, pointing out the lack of knowledge, the contradiction of ignorant "believes" that are an expression of more or less emotional rebellion against the repressive system - but nothing more...
    If you are really serious about the stuff we talk about, you will have to make a decision for yourself and you will have to follow that decision to get what you want - against the brainwash and the repression of the ruling system. Sounds a bit scary... and sometimes it's really scary.
    Most of the "self styled Anarchists" fail in this and resort to stupid stands of selfdefence, keeping up endless debates without ever realizing their basic problem - that's where the trouble starts...

    Rebels without a cause tend to end up as the fool on a hill - achiving nothing, so they are a loss to the more aware/conscious people in the movement, a loss to the cause and a disappointment to the efford wasted on them to make them conscious of themselves able to decide and contribute their part - frustration isn't a nearly adequate expression for this... anger is understandable, but even anger won't change anything.

    Running this site isn't that easy, each and every one of the providers/users have their problems in real life too, not to mention the participation in the actual struggle against the system - in a short term:
    humans in serious distress - so the tolerance might be a bit weaker than you or I ever expected. So it's decicion time again:
    It's a bit rough on sites like this and I still don't like it, but I'm starting to realize the real reason for this roughness, so I'm able to stand it/tolerate it even if I won't take part of it.
    On the other, more important side: I still have to learn and educate myself and I think this site is a real great opportunity to do it - lots of different points of view, lots of conscious people and information - so I'll stay as long as I'm accepted.

    Ungov,
    I didn't critisized you in particular/personally, I was critisizing the general tendency to get lost in the fuckinstupidmoron thingie - with all the useless consequences - But unless proven otherwise: We are all comrades, 'cause of this we should be pay each other at least the basic respect.
    You and humble me had nearly the same little skirmish about ten days ago and I think I've learned a lesson or two out of it:
    I don't really know you and my impression of you is a bit two sided - You are very passionate about our believes and your eagerness to spread the word and further the cause is quite adorable, I really appreciate that, I hope you believe me.
    But this obviously general "patience thing" still worries me a bit - even when I have to admit my lack of realisation/insight of your special situation related to the site and your work for the users. I'm sorry for that - even more 'cause I'm realiszing the burden you took over contributing to the providing and running of this site.
    You're allright with me, comrade Ungovernable, and I hope you can accept it.

    So back to the frontlines - gun control...
     
  10. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    I obviously did not know what I was getting myself into here! I sincerely apologize for my disrespectful comments. For the most part I get really heated when people insult my views, vAsSiLy77 is right I do need to get over myself. So when I get heated I start spitting off things that I know what they mean but others don't get the full context, and for that I am sorry. I am looking towards anarchy for something to believe in, because right now I really don't have anything I care about.

    I am also not selfish, egocentric maybe, I haven't quite figured that out. If you all will allow me, I would like to retract my previous statements and rephrase them on how I really meant them.

    I do believe (in my as of yet infantile knowledge of anarchy) that I should be allowed to do all the things I want to and how I want to.... to an extent.
    I understand that I will always have to be around other people and work with them to survive and live a good life. But what I can do is become as self-sufficient as I possibly can so I don't need many others to survive. I have read in the past about communal anarchy on anarchy.net. I recognized that communal anarchism is a good start but there needs to be more, at least for me.

    Secondly when I said MY right to do whatever,whenever, however, I did mean MY right. However, MY right, seeing that I am equal to all other human beings solely based on the fact that I am one, is everyone else's right as well. I care about others freedom and I want everyone on earth to realize that they should be able to have that freedom. It is NOT just me.

    As to the starving children comment.
    Like I said before I am not a bleeding heart, I have a pragmatical view of what I can do for something and what I cannot. That's just the way I am.
    I really do think it is terrible that it is happening, but as of right now I literally can do nothing to stop it. I have no money to give to charities where it won't even go to help them nor do I have to means to send food myself. I would if I could. At the same time. I also think that there are way to many people on earth anyways. It is silly I know but....

    Keep in mind, I approached this type of forum completely in the wrong way and attacked, much more knowledgeable people's fact driven arguments, with my own opinions, which caught a lot of criticism I wasn't ready for making my responses rash and without evidence. What is said above is the best I can articulate on the subject, it is not a defense nor a way to make myself look better. This is what I really meant in the first place but was unable to articulate it correctly.

    As for gun control.
    Yes, I have grown up in America. I hate it here, I have been out of the country more times than many Americans. Every time I come back into the States after having been abroad the first thing I see is a video camera watching me, an armed pig and a list of things you cannot have or do. Welcome to the land of the free right? Anyways, during the establishment of the colonies in America in the 16 hundreds the colonist established militias in order to defend themselves from the French providence to the north. These militias stayed in the colonies until the American Revolution. Which in deed was revolutionary for multiple reasons. (If you would like to here my reasons why please ask, I have taken several courses on it) These militia's though they did not necessarily win the war or do good things, were still a key player in the final victory of a hopeful republic, which is what the United States wanted to be until James Madison started pushing federalism.
    Having said that, these militia men were armed with guns. They owned guns to hunt, and to defend themselves from Mourning Wars. During the 7 Years War between the British and their colonies, and the French, the Native American population was devastated. The Iroqouis nation was forced to choose sides, so tribes from all over the Great lakes area were fighting brother to brother. During this war was the first time the peace fire of (I am sorry but I forget the name of the Tribe) went out in 300 years. Mourning Wars, were a sacred thing to the Native Americans, because if a member of the tribe was killed in battle or taken prisoner, the Native Americans believed his energy was lost and it needed to be replaced. They would do this by scalping American colonists or taking women and children "prisoner" and assimilating them into their culture. Guns did not start this. This practice was between tribes at first, but then, the white man came along and represented a common enemy to the Native Americans. The colonist and the British though they traded weapons and ammunition to the Native Americans were only trying to defend their ill-begotten land. However, by this point (the 7 Years War) the Anglo- Europeans had already taken deep root in Native American land and were not leaving.

    My point is that as Ungovernable said, their are more guns than cars in the United States, how the hell are we to get rid of them? I believe that of course they are necessary for revolution in today's society and political structure, but I think that since they are here and because they are most likely not going away, we should have them as protection. Correct me if I am wrong but I think syndicalism plays in here. I think that once anarchists have established their community it won't be world wide. At first. Not to mention that there will communities of racist fuckheads, capitalistic communities and all sorts of other oppressive communities as well. These people will have guns in the immediate aftermath of a revolution, which in turn means that they will try to push their agenda and their beliefs across the revolutionary plain. To me guns are necessary because I believe that it is not only important to defend yourself, but it is your obligation to defend the freedom of the others around you. I believe that if one group or community was to try and take power then it is the responsibility of every other community around you to rise up against this oppressor. I say this because in my view of human nature (granted it is subjective) that there will always be someone to try to take power over you and or someone else.

    This is why I believe they should be around. I understand that this could cause constant warfare. I don't know to remedy that. But at the same time I believe in I guess as vAsSiLy77 said primitivism. Where we should be a part of our natural environment and act completely on impulse and instinct, which I understand now is not part of anarchy at all. So someone please enlighten me on this.

    I hope this doesn't sound to hypocritical because I don't mean it to be. Point out where you think it is please.
     
  11. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    Again, I am looking for people to tell me where I am mislead, wrong or contrary to this movement. I am not going to convert my beliefs I am just trying to understand "everyone's" position. I am really not trying to defend myself, in fact, tear it apart please! I don't want to be that fool on the hill. I want to be that guy in black on the hill with the hundreds of thousands standing next to him.
     
  12. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Don't worry i have nothing against you even if we had some disagreement in the past. I'm happy we can center on what unite us instead of fighting each others...



    You still don't understand that YOU are the one who started insulting my views, i was just trying to explain you that you are wrong without insults. I didn,t insult you first - you did.

    Same thing.

    This is a big cliché of anarchism.

    Anarchism is about thinking about the community first, and then in the second place, thinking about the individuals. Even in an anarchist society you wouldn't be allowed to do all the things you want and how you want it. Nazis wouldn't be tolerated, organised religions wouldn't be tolerated, political partys wouldn't be tolerated, no murders, no rape, no pedophilia, and probably no weapons too.

    If the community decides something together, then the freedom of the community is more important than your freedom. It isn't the best words to explain how it works, but it is a quick definition.

    "other people" include africans and people too far away from you to care. Anarchism is globalism / internationalism, not nationalism and self-centered fighting.

    This is definatly not what you said some post earlier. In fact, you said the exact opposite of that.

    Nobody talked about charity. Charity is a scam and in an anti-capitalist point of view this is totally useless and dumb, you would just be playing the role of the "useful idiot" of capitalism and prove others that capitalism has the solution to help people victim of the system (povrety and homelessness). I won't get into this subject here, it is a complex topic and a different debate..

    We talked about MUTUAL AID (in reference to Kropotkin) which is definatly not the same thing.

    This is absolutly ridiculous.

    Thank you for the history lessons but this is off topic and we don't care.

    You still don't understand our point of views. Guns would still be necessary to make a revolution AND after the revolution but not everyone would have a gun, there would be some sort of organisation just like during the spanish revolution where the armed struggle was centered on the CNT syndicate and anarchist militias. I explained this many times on other topics, just search.

    Now you are just being a fatalist and a defeatist.

    Even in the USA guns are banned in some areas.

    We are not going to get rid of all guns in USA, this is impossible, but we can contribute to greatly decrase the numbers and at least fight against war weapons. There is no justification for the need of owning war weapons like AK-47 and M16 for a simple citizen.

    Again, this is the bullshit propaganda of insecurity by governments and rifle associations. No insecurity in anarchism, no need for dumb guns to protect yourself. Most of the countries in the world have bans on guns and they dont feel like they need them to protect themselves..

    ???????????????????

    Anarchism is internationalism, it will always aim forward to an international revolution. And anyway i believe a revolution in north america isn't possible without a worldwide revolution, for many reasons i will not explain here (off-topic)

    You are crazy or what ? Anarchists will always fight against racist fuckheads and on other levels against capitalist communities. No way we would allow racist to make their own communities. And even if it happenned this isn't an argument to tolerate guns everywhere. The syndicates and organisations who would have fought during the revolution would still be here to protect the community against attack from outside.

    Holy fucking shit, i already explained and answered this argument dozens of times. Guns are needed to defend the community and freedom of others BUT THIS IS NOT A DAMN REASON TO GIVE A GUN TO ALL CITIZEN AND LET THEM BUY A MACHINE GUN AS EASILY AS THEY GUY BUBBLE GUM.

    Even in today's capitalist countries with gun bans, the police still have guns to protect others freedom. In an anarchist society it would be similar, except the role of the police would be replaced by the people themselves, BUT they would be organized through specific organisations and syndicates since you just CAN'T LET EVERYONE HAVE A GUN.

    This is not a fucking reason to let EVERYONE have a gun.


    I already explained many times, you just refuse to learn. I even quoted the first anarchist philosophers, but you ignored me. I'm starting to lose hope with you.
     
  13. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    I am trying here, I really am. But, it looks like I have a lot of reading to do. I do apologize for my early insults towards your beliefs, I am new at this and it is my mistake. I don't think I will post for awhile until I fully understand your position. I was posting so much because arguing with people helps me learn. And I understand why you don't have patience with me and I respect that.
    Honestly though, thank you for your criticisms and input, but over the past few days this site has really sparked me into a research frenzy and I mean no offense but I don't think anarcho-communism is my cup of tea. I read some Bakunin as well as Kropotkin (just the stuff I could find online), but I also read Stirner and a few other egoists, and I can relate with them and understand them better than anarcho-communism. I am going to use them as a starting point, and delve deeper into this. I know your opinion Ungovernable but, I respectfully disagree... at this point, there is a good chance I will come around to understand and agree, but as of now. I do not.
    Again thank you very much.
     
  14. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Arguing with ppl is the best way to learn! Although it can be sometimes hard to separate an attack on your political position with a personal attack, being open to rather harsh criticism about yr politics is highly advantageous although rather difficult to achieve. And remember we're not always right either. ;)
     
  15. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    I am open to criticism of all sorts, I have a hard time reacting to it ha ha. Right now though, I cannot present a logical argument based on the theory, history, and philosophy of the subject, so being criticized by much more knowledgeable people makes me want to fight harder to be right, which in turn will lead me to make rash generalizations (hopefully not personal attacks) and uninformed assumptions. So I need to come back armed to the teeth ;) with knowledge of course! Not weapons!. Thank you Butcher
     
  16. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    You can keep posting and ask questions if you want to learn

    Why ? For what reasons ?

    I think you just don't understand it. Tradional anarchism is very similar to anarcho-communism, it is almost a synonymous...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism
    http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php/anarcho-communism
    http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=6960
    http://libcom.org/thought/anarchist-com ... troduction
    http://nefac.net/node/157
    http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?st ... 1021039100

    Stirner is bullshit. A selfish bastards who only cares about himself and not the community.

    An individualist revolution is just impossible. never happenned and never will. On the other side, there is many historical examples of anarcho-communism in action.

    Max Stirner is the WORST starting point ever. If you never read other anarchist theories and you read stirner, you will be very confused and you will have an absolutly wrong interpretation of what anarchism is. Trust me i know a lot of anarcho-communists and anarchosyndicalists who were confused many years because they started with Max Stirner and today they regret it and they are anti-stirner.
     
  17. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    Alright so Stirner not a good place to start!
    From what I have read so far, it seems to me that even after a revolution when the collectivists and communities solidify there is still a"controlling force" I use that term lightly for lack of a better word. What have gathered from what I have read is that yes anarcho-communism will be the most prominent of the communities that will arise. I understand that and I understand that living in a community is the best and most effective means of living, but it also takes away from the individual in certain ways. I understand that in the Spanish Revolution it was largely collectivist but there were a few individualists that strayed away from the collective, but for the most part most people decided to go with the collective to survive. As of yet I am still confused as to how the syndicates work as opposed to the bureaucracy of say a communist state. Which doesn't need to be explained I will soon do more reading into the issue. I know it is a very naive thing to say but, this is what I understand as of now.
    My question is, is why the individual cannot have his own sovereignty, within the community, and why can the individual not be able to make a choice based on the way he would like to live his life?
    Secondly, say that anarcho-communism becomes the working ideology. An individual, who still contributes to the collective though not often, and not isolationist, decides he needs a weapon to survive while he resides on the outskirts of the collective and its collective protection?
    Thirdly, in anarchist society, why does there have to be social regulation? Or rather, why must everyone subscribe to this society and make choices based on others before themselves?
    I am not saying that all choices made by an individual will be contrary to the society but, I feel one needs to help himself before he helps others.
    What is the problem with belief in Anarcho-communism?
     
  18. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89 Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    what is the problem with this belief in anarcho-communism*
    Excuse me.
     
  19. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
  20. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    There is no real problem, 'cause Stirners "Individualism" is less than a footnote in the annals of philosophy, even the marxists couldn't stand his mouse-in-a-wolf-pelt-blabbing and his work wasn't really recognized as important, it was nearly forgotten only to be ripped from it's grave by some weirdo intellectuals - ok, it's unfair to judge people like makay but he has some really creepy personal aspects...
    Stirners writings may have had some impact on the early karl marx, but marx kept on being an authorian and 'cause of this failed consequently.
    Stirner also critisized Proundhon who is important for Anarchism, but I have to admit that I never have read his writings about Proundhon, I was already very disappointed with Stirners general lack of useful tactics/strategies concerning the practice in reality, sometimes he mentioned clubs/associations, but he never gave a serious explanation.
    The same applies for his writings about pedagogic/education - he mentioned the importance of respecting the individual and the use brainwash to produce future slaves - but he lacks an explanation of the alternatives - so what?
    Some of the libertarians/individual Anarchists claim Stirners heritage, but most of it is made up by makay, it's still difficult to find ol'max'ens points, so even the existencialists claim him - not very useful in everydays struggle.
    Besides I think the individualist movement is too limited, too prone to be assimilated by the same system they refuse to support with taxes ect. I may be wrong but I remember that the individualists reject revolution to abolish the system, 'cause revolution is forcing the oppressors and their lackeys to give in - what a mess!

    It's true that you and me and everybody else is a unique beeing, my three daughters were born as triplets i.e. they are genetically equal in the extrem - but each of them is gracing this planet with a very special/individual way how to deal with the outside and it's circumstances, even only at the age of 20 months they'll show you their uniqueness...

    It's also true that our species "homo sapiens sapiens" is the "crown of creation" - in our evolution we were able to occupy the whole planet, adopt to each challenge of enviroment, we broke the foodchain, developed technology and we're the only species able to choose how to do this or that - no other species was that successful, no other species is that resourceful.
    We could rule the planet as a collective choosing not to rule our kind, and we will not rule our kind - but first we have to become the collective by making the right decicion as an individual.

    And it's also true that you are the very center of your world like I am the center of mine - and so on.
    Nobody except you see's things really from YOUR point of view, nobody except you feels exactly your pleasure or pain - you are unique and so is your individual relation to the outside world - maybe it's just sad that we could not connect close enough to communicate really "direct" to each other - but it's reality/ a natural limitation.
    We are able to adopt to this limitation by communicating, we can convince people and we can be convinced by people, maybe we have to compromise to get a result we can agree with - but at least we get the best possible result without repression or complete rejection. It's not that bad...

    Back to Stirners problems - what's the use of dwelling endlessly in your own uniqueness to shape "your" world - facing the fact that you're on your own and all alone and just to weak to cut down a large tree, hunt, plant and harvest enough to eat or defend yourself against a pack of wolves, a bear, the man eating monster from the abyss?
    Whats so hard to join others with the same needs - and build, produce and defend the community all together?
    As you already stated the collective way to deal with reality is more effective, but I think it's also more easier for the individual, more entertaining - and don't forget: WE ARE SOCIAL BEINGS - I think butcher enlighted us with some important examples. You need people around you just for fun, to feel save and accepted - unless you are an eremit...
    Few weeks ago I watched a hollywood movie - I think "Into The Wilds" - about a young guy deciding to retreat into the woods after finishing high school - he starved blocked by only the high water of a small river...
     
Loading...