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

Anarchy = the burning anger within me... CHAOS AND DISORDER ftw

Discussion in 'New members introductions' started by NYPigsDonuts, Mar 2, 2011.

  1. NYPigsDonuts

    NYPigsDonuts Member Forum Member


    17

    0

    0

    Mar 2, 2011
     
    Hey hey hey! so i joined here with a few goals...

    I've been losing interest in the whole anarchy thing... I still HATE the idea of authority... but all i ever understood about anarchy is it was a system alternative to the current one i live in... a system with no official authority... and a pretty equal start for everyone and a good world to live in... sounds great... really does... and it seems theres a lifestyle that comes along? i never did anything but sit at home and think about how i hate what the world is right now... i wanna do things and make a change... and anarchy still sounds like my idea of the ultimate goal... so i wanna spark my interest back in it...

    also as i sort of said... i would like to meet up with people with similar ideas... I'm on long island... i have been getting homeschooled recently... long story...

    Also stuff about me... I'm 16... I love punk rock(my main favorite), metal, and old school hip hop USED to be my shit! Im in highschool... and yeah thats about it

    and excuse the title... i just wanted an interesting title... yes i know anarchy isnt disorder and chaos...
     

  2. JackNegativity

    JackNegativity Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    885

    1

    28

    Nov 9, 2010
     


    OOOh man. I almost had to rip into you, something I promised myself i'd try not to do. :lmao:

    Welcome to the board. :)
     
  3. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Chaos and disorder = stupid
     
  4. Polden

    Polden Member Forum Member


    13

    0

    0

    Feb 25, 2010
     
    Which he has corrected at the end of his post :)

    Welcome dude, I think your in about the same boat as me. I'm just interested in how I can learn more about what I can do.
     
  5. JesusCrust

    JesusCrust Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    1,085

    1

    0

    Apr 17, 2010
     
    I also wanted to rip so bad. Yes anarchy is order, and yes it is an alternative "system." Unlike what you're told and taught from an early age, anarchy isn't synonymous with chaos. rather anarchism is order, and, as the name insists, lack of hierarchy. There are "rules" though unofficial, contrary to outdated ideas of anarchism, racism, sexism, homophobia, classism, etc are not tolerated. Just imagine it as communism, but with no authority.
     
  6. KAAOS-82

    KAAOS-82 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    590

    1

    16

    Jul 13, 2010
     
    I disagree Ungov.
    One must have chaos within oneself to give birth to a dancing star.
    Chaos is spontaneity, Order is tedium.

    I think your confusing rules with mutual acceptance of liberty.
    It's as simplistic as treat those the way you want to be treated. Rules indicate your bound by social/political/heirachical pressure.
     
  7. Caps

    Caps Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    393

    1

    6

    Nov 3, 2010
     
    As poetic as that second sentence is, Proudhon would probably shit at that.

    My advice would be to read up some more. I first got into Anarchism about 16 through the FAQ. There is a link under the politics section here or just google Anarchist FAQ. It's huge so choose a bit from the contents that seems to answer a question or criticism you have. Good luck...
     
  8. NYPigsDonuts

    NYPigsDonuts Member Forum Member


    17

    0

    0

    Mar 2, 2011
     
    what do you mean communism has authority? from my understanding, from my communist buddy, he told me both are the same at the end... like after communisms cycle(i have a poor understanding of how true communism works).... i guess i have a lot to learn... and i DO understand the real basics of anarchy that you stated... its just thats all i know... is the basics... I'll read the faq... thanks guys!
     
  9. Bakica

    Bakica Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    951

    0

    0

    Feb 21, 2010
     
    Dunno if I can explain it to you..hmm let me put it this way - anarchy and communism have lot in common, but the way they are achiving their goal is diffrent. And, of course, there is dictatorship communism, you must consider that to. But that's just other story we can talk about.
     
  10. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Attempt to kill two birds with one stone (ie respond to both comments quoted above):

    Firstly, welcome NYPD! :D

    In essence NYPD, your mate is right. However, the Anarchist critique of Marx (of whom we are speaking when one refers to Communism) is kinda based around his concept of History (Bakica & JC are, it appears to me, referring more to Marxist-Leninism, a point I'll get back to).

    For Marx, history is both one-direction and driven by economics. Following Marx, A leads to B Leads to C, etc; ie Feudalism lead to Capitalism, Capitalism develops until we can have Socialism (a big point, one i'll revisit again with reference to Lenin), before finally we reach the Endpoint of History in Communism (hence Fukuyama's title The End of History when he was celebrating Neo-Liberalism's 'victory' in the early 90s). Anarchists instead see C (communism) as something to be fought for now, fuck the intermediate stages. It was for this reason that the Menshiviks accused Lenin of being an 'anarchist', as they urged caution ('material conditions are not ready for socialism', etc) whilst Lenin seized power.

    Secondly, some anarchists have argued Marx's structure (the economy)/ Superstructure (politics, religion, etc) analysis as flawed by pointing to examples where political or religious interests have undermined economic progress. This point is more academic than instructive though...

    I guess the most obvious dispute between Marx and anarchists can be read in the dispute between Marx & Bakunin, although its worth noting its a very boring read if yr not a nerd...

    So yeah, as previously noted, go read the Anarchist FAQ, its excellent. However, in order to understand the points it makes as to how anarchism and marxism differ, you kinda need to read some Marx too (also because most anarchists take their analysis of Capitalism from Marx). The Communist Manifesto is short and easy to read, but pretty fucking useless insofar as it is not written as an analysis, but instead as a party program for the (German) Communist Party and as propaganda for said party. Instead better to read Capital, Class Struggle in France or Negri's Marx Beyond Marx. Most of Marx's stuff is up on the internetz if you're at all interested...


    In reference to Bakica's point about different methods, and about dictatorship communism, we have to start dealing with post-Marxist figures, and our experiences of actual, existing Communism. In contrast to anarchism, where we see only temporary (Spain 1936, Ukraine 1917-1920ish, etc) or speculative (Primitivist claims of millennia of cavemen anarchists, subjective anthropological studies of 'hunter-gatherer' societies, 'pirate utopias', etc) examples of anarchist societies, Communism has had many (USSR, China, Cuba, et al.); all of which were shithouse. Why? Largely due to Socialism, and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

    The two big groups of Marxists that relate to this problem is the Marxist-Leninists (i include the trots and stalinists under this banner as they shared Lenin's premise on this point) & the Maoists (include Che, Ho Chi Minh, etc); the latter only mentioned as separate due to their views on the peasantry (lumpen proletariat in Marxese). And that problem is the Vanguard Party. The 'most advanced' sections of 'the working class' (read: mostly the middle class intelligentsia), organised into a political party, have the duty to lead the revolution, seize the powers of the state and build communism.

    They claim that by doing this they have created Socialism and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (a phrased coined by Marx, by more akin to direct democracy than a dictatorship); instead, the vanguard party creates nothing but the Dictatorship of that Party (in the most common understanding of dictatorship). In seizing state power, they doing nothing but replace one ruling class with another. Thus, as opposed to the trots, anarchists argue Leninism caused Stalinism; and why all 'Communist' revolutions lead to not much more than tyranny, often worse than what we live under due to our bourgeois rulers.

    I guess thats why I, as an anarchist, would argue that anarchism differs from communism in its refusal to take power through the State & in refusing to be satisfied with the 'transitional' phase of Socialism. Moreover, I would argue these refusals are necessary in order to actually build communism.
     
  11. NYPigsDonuts

    NYPigsDonuts Member Forum Member


    17

    0

    0

    Mar 2, 2011
     
    thanks for the long detailed response! that answered the majority of basic things i wanted to know about communism... I'll read about Marxism more in depth too... This kid i was talking about said he was a Leninist... he told me about the vanguard a bit, but i was very confused on that... now i understand it better...
     
  12. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    cheers, i thought i may have actually been a bit too crackademic-y with me response, I'm glad you followed.

    Also, i kinda use the term communism (in the sense of what we are fighting for) rather interchangeably with anarchism (ie 'we want to build communism/anarchism). Other anarchists no doubt have problems with that. However, I should note that Marxism and Anarchism are in no way interchangeable (nor are the two static). Moreover, Marx was, in a sense, less Marxist than many Marxists you'll meet.

    Finally, autonomist marxists (Negri, et al), Situationists (Debord, Vaneigem, Lefebvre to an extent...), or the Frankfurt school (Adorno, Marcuse) makes far superior Marxist reading then the shit dribbled out of the mouths of the murderous thugs: Trotsky, Lenin, Mao, etc... Gramsci is also good reading.
     
  13. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Also dude, is that an Iron Cross behind the circle a in yr avatar...

    Could you change it? Being a Nazi reference and all...
     
  14. NYPigsDonuts

    NYPigsDonuts Member Forum Member


    17

    0

    0

    Mar 2, 2011
     
    ok once again thanks for the info
     
  15. NYPigsDonuts

    NYPigsDonuts Member Forum Member


    17

    0

    0

    Mar 2, 2011
     
    wait... i used the iron cross as a symbol of strength... i mean it was used in germany before the nazis, and it was commonly used in nyhc... thats like saying if i had a sun wheel because i was a norse pagan, it would be a nazi thing... symbols arent THAT important to me, so im not trying to start an argument... and i just bought an iron cross belt lol... im hoping people dont think im a neo nazi because i have it... if you still really feel it is offensive because the nazis used it... i will take the avatar off no problem...
     
  16. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    I'd personally prefer you not to have it, but I'm not too concerned, nor do i think you're a neo-nazi
     
  17. KAAOS-82

    KAAOS-82 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    590

    1

    16

    Jul 13, 2010
     
    The Iron Cross dates back to 1813 and so predates nazi germany.
    I don't see the Iron Cross as a problem, its used as a symbol nowadays to promote non-confirmity and toughness.
     
  18. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Ha, I actually thought it was an Anarchist Circle A spray painted over an Iron Cross....yeah NYPD, even though it was pre-Nazi, it was still a symbol of the German military under the Kaiser and look at all the wonderful things they were responsible for...
    The Swastika also pre-dates Nazi Germany....so what? Really, fuck all the symbols that they adopted for themselves, whatever meaning they had, and whatever they stood for they are forever tainted. The Iron Cross, the Deaths Head, The SS bolts, The Imperial Eagle, The Swastika, fuck 'em all.
     
  19. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Considering it is still used by the German military, its 'symbolic non-conformity' is a bit daft....
     
  20. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Moreover, Nazis iz non-conformists too!

    also, the numbers 14 & 88 reportedly date back to around AD825, doesn't mean they don't mean something a bit different now...