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

what is anarchy to you

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by Anxiety69, Nov 10, 2009.

  1. BlinkoChrist

    BlinkoChristExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    158

    1

    0

    Nov 1, 2009
     
    That's completly fine. I'm just glad we can disagree and not be jerks to one another. I'm sure there's a lot of things we would agree on.
     
  2. rebel

    rebelExperienced Member Experienced member


    54

    0

    0

    Oct 13, 2009
     
    you are born with such manners or you are learned in capitalist society about "possession manners"? I grew up in socialism, the same as polish girl, and if we live together we share what we have. western people, even when they give something, they expect something to get. they have especial striving for property in their head, even when they give a gift, they expect to get something. if I give, I don't care to get something. materialism is one of the most important component of capitalism, it is such mentality which bring people to work for big bosses in order to have everything what exist in present world, but they don't get enough big salary so they must take credit from bank to buy it. materialism produce debts and people must work more and more for capitalists in order to buy million things which present society produce. (plus advertisements convince them to buy)

    Jack, I like social anarchism because I grew up together with other people, and I think that people are social animals. I don't need stirner and egoism, because who prefer only himself, he will leave you in trouble, and we will have troubles during fight against present system. egoism and individualism is good for ruling class, rulers are organized and individuals don't have chance to win, people must organize to destroy present system. after it, everybody will find/create community like he needs.
    but if I understood good, you are not against orgznizing:) so, I just explain my way of thinking...

    by the way, bonanno just repeat ludist and situationist phrases and way of thinking, I read his Armed Joy before several days and I threw away it in the garbage after half reading. blabla and nothing new. in any case, I support attacks on the state but I don't care for blabla of situationists and bob black, etc. I watch personality and position of writer, to understand his in/dependence about topic which he describe/criticize, so i don't care for eccentric bob black who criticize work while he enjoy benefits of lawyer job in USA, while many workers don't have what to eat and they must go to work. watch who are situationists, from which class they come, what was their position even if they made rebellion, and you will understand their story. some people don't have contact with workers and they speak constantly how things are changed and it is not anymore like before 100 years. I would recommend them to visit favellas in south america, and factories in any continent, and to say to me after it, is something changed?
    I can conclude, present writers, in last 50 years, come from rich families and they are not connected with workers, than with artists and NGOs activists, so of course they have their theories about NEW TIME, they dream about abolishing of works because they got on the plate everything without to work, so nothing bad for them if workers stop to work, but workers would die hungry if they stop to work. simply, even mostly anarchists today are students and people who didn't work on the land from childhood in order to have what to eat, therefore they like stirner, egoism and they just make philosophy. nothing bad for them even if present system survive. Kropotkin and Bakunin left their rich families and chose to be poor together with workers and peasants, present anarchists will never do it. they will enjoy good life of their families, they will use connections to find good job and to have good life in present system, and they will be together with artists and other children of riches. in the end, they started to make theories which have nothing with workers and society than with their own "exclusive" small groups.
     
  3. ASA

    ASAExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    "rulers are organized and individuals don't have chance to win, people must organize to destroy present system. after it, everybody will find/create community like he needs."

    i agree

    i don't agree with the sentiment we must dwell in the past as this is a different time for many countries but going back to the organised start would be a start, unfortunately we have to mould it ouf of something that has been so insidious for so long that we have to be a little more maleable than the average anarchist/sometimes but if you know the basics you don't have to argue, attack personality or split

    i personally have left many groups for their laisse faire approach(no basic mandate that anybody can understand), lack of the individual, lack of reality to the outside world they inhabit , lack of compromise, talking about the same thing rather than focussing, groups of personalities taking over groups ,rather than leading to debates leads to silence and human bolitics, what the hell is wrong with a circle and letting ever1 get a say once and round again and time limit(like they have on social network sites as it were, its good practice and another skill), too many rules apparently, words then mean nothing, its fun for some while the others starve

    and yes it's been usurped, thats when individualism not just ego can come in, every person by their own means and get busy organising, if people call you out for not doing it exactly thier way apart from basics, they're probabaly not doing it right anyway, stay strong, stay true, results
     
  4. Jack

    JackExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    0

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    The point of my post is that there's no such thing as an individualized conception of Anarchism, that it is what it is. That is a class based revolutionary Communist movement.
     
  5. thoreau_me_a_bone

    thoreau_me_a_boneExperienced Member Experienced member


    70

    0

    0

    Oct 29, 2009
     
    I dont mind socialism or collectivism/communism within an overall free market. But beyond that I think they're extremely faulty systems.

    In communist/socialist countries you guys may share with eachother, but everyone is kept on a certain level. A free market may cause people to be a little more careful with their lives, but it also breeds excellence. Hate on the system's downfalls as much as you want, but capitalism has been the main thing that has created incredible technology in medicine, computers, art etc.

    I think collectivism works well on a small scale, and especially for the poor/working class. But what if I want to be a millionaire and live in a mansion? If you truly believe in no rulers, then how can you say I cant be a rich bastard? Btw, Im a broke ass nigga, so dont hate...

    The other point I want to make is that the word capitalism has been mutated (like the word liberal) to mean something closer to corporatism or fascism. Almost every problem within capitalism has to do with the government trying to regulate the system, or to make some money off it. Mussolini described the state we're heading towards as the Corporate State, when businesses and government merge. Look at the takeover of GMC, the takeover of health care, the money we paid to those AIG crooks, the fact that both Bush and Cheney had money invested in companies the government worked with (i.e. haliburton).
    You can say that the lack of regulation in the market was what let them work for/invest in companies the government was working with, but if we had no leaders then we wouldnt have to worry about this shit.

    I think for anarchism to be successful we must build many different kinds of small communities within an overall free market. Those who choose to have a different system can do so, but to abolish the free market is (in my opinion) against the very nature of liberation.


    And no....I hate the casualties. Always have....now the Capitalist casualties are awesome.
     
  6. BlinkoChrist

    BlinkoChristExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    158

    1

    0

    Nov 1, 2009
     
    Well said man. It's not to see well thought out intelligent replies on this kind of stuff. Corporations are destroying are country along with gangs and violence, I'm glad you can express your opinions without being a total fucker about it, especially when others (like me) don't know how to express ourselves.
     
  7. Jack

    JackExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    0

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    If you're not a socialist then you're not an Anarchist, plain and simple.

    You're fucking kidding me right? Can we thank Capitalism for air, fire, and water too? Humans advance technology because we advance fucking technology, not because of your wonderful fucking market.

    No you can't be because you're living off of other people. Plus we can't all be millionares, none of us will ever be, so your analogy is fucking stupid because you act like value comes from out of thin air. No you can't have your nice house, no you can't be a millionare, fucking deal with it. I can say you can't because then you're taking money from other people, thus exploiting them.

    Hai Ayn Rand, I'm sorry you have the wrong forum, this one's for Anarchists, nice to meet you though. Crying ZOMG FASCISM because something was fucking nationalized is rediculous, is the UK Fascist because they have the NHS?

    Utopian. Your "free market" is fucking slavery and I want no fucking part of it. CAPITALISM IS SLAVERY. Don't give me the whole "make communes" crap, because it's impossible to opt out of capitalism or your "free" market.[/quote]
     
  8. BlinkoChrist

    BlinkoChristExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    158

    1

    0

    Nov 1, 2009
     
    Jack, you are an asshole. I don't see any point in trying to debate with you at all.
     
  9. Jack

    JackExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    0

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    Thanks, you're saving me the hassle. I'm not going to stand back and let the anarchist movement fall prey to the revisionism spawned by middle class teenagers.
     
  10. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    2,342

    5

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 42 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    Nope, instead it falls apart because of intolerant violence breeders like you. the so called "middle class teenagers" are the future of this movement. So talking shit to them isn't going to secure much of a future for it.

    -the anxietist
     
  11. Jack

    JackExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    0

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    Proof? I'm just an actual Anarchist who's pissed that just about anyone can attatch "anarcho" to their name and be accepted by the sythesists and closet liberals who are outside the actual movement. It deligitimizes the movement because all the baggage of the anarcho-whatevers makes us appear like we're just having a circle jerk, not going anywhere. Anarchism is an actual ideology and movement, not some vague liberal idea. So all the pacifists/market fundies/cappies/lifestylists/nationalists/liberals/racists/ecofascists need their shit handed to them.

    It's kind of sad you want an explicitly working class movement carried on by middle class punks. I highly doubt that me not tolerating bullshit is going to kill the movement, rather it'll be revisionism which does it. Shit, just look at the (first) Anarchist Federation in France, which took upon a revolutionary Communist character until its ranks swelled with revisionists and lifestylists and it fell apart.
     
  12. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    2,342

    5

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 42 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    Ok Jack, correct me if I am wrong, but you are making it sound like you are not willing to work with anyone who doesn't share your ideology verbatim? People who share the common goal of anarchism but may also be (to use your words) pacifists/market fundies/cappies/lifestylists/nationalists/liberals/racists/ecofascists?
     
  13. Jack

    JackExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    0

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    If they're racists then I'm going to kick the shit out of them. If they're nationalists then I'm not working with them. If they're market fundies or cappies, we're not working towards the same goal. If they're lifestylists they're not doing anything productive enough to work with. If they're ecofascists I'll work with them on enviromental projects and other stuff, but primmies are reactionary. If they're pacifists then they're not working towards revolution, but I'd still work with them on anti-war shit, same for liberals.

    That doesn't make them Anarchists, though, because I already work with liberals and pacifists on stuff, they're annoying as fuck though.
     
  14. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    2,342

    5

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 42 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    extreme, but point made. i would have a hard time working with racists. Well, let me take that back because most people don't think they are racist, until you hear some sort of slur come out... I wouldn't want to work with someone who was proud to be racist.

    I also agree about fundies and cappies, as to me capitalism seems to be an opposite of anarchsim. I'm not sure what a lifestylist is, feel free to explain to me.

    My point in asking that is that Jack, you seem very angry, and u seem to be more into dividing then uniting, and I think there are enough factors dividing us already then having like minded people doing it as well. The system wants to keep us divided and arguing amongst ourselves, so we won't make any effort against them. I think we need to figure out some common ground and end this infighting. just my 2 cents, and i am done arguing about this... I hope :)
     
  15. rebel

    rebelExperienced Member Experienced member


    54

    0

    0

    Oct 13, 2009
     
    bravo jack, you have my support. polarizationj is necessary in order to bring changes. many people make mistake when they strive always to be united, uniting has hidden hegemony: "it is not allowed to criticize, you must support".
    in any case, organizing is good, but not with those who are counter to anarchism. primis and capitalist who misuse word anarcho are really far away from anarchists and anarchism. and surely, they are not workers than individual philosophers and others...
     
  16. Vegetarian Barbarian

    Vegetarian BarbarianExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    719

    0

    0

    Oct 19, 2009
     
    How is beating the fuck out of a rascist extreme? That guy would beat the fuck out of someone who is not of their skin or "race" so fuck them, if they dont die from a beat down id say their getting off easy.
     
  17. Jack

    JackExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    0

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    Rebel basically said my response to Anxiety before I could.

    Lifestylists are those who try to "opt out" of capitalism. Usually by squatting, stealing, dumpster diving, not working etc. The difference between them and a regular homeless person is they do it because they think it's their job as an anarchist, and they usually come from upper/middle class families, so it's always a choice.
     
  18. ASA

    ASAExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    I will work with anyone who is sympathetic to the basic principle of no govt and unbiased and open to that, i even turn my back on indvidualists which most seem to do due to cricumstance who act like total collectivists(leninists in my eyes), they r wat jack talks about, they almost waste everybodies time and they don't care and i refute their imposition but we are going the same way so...i wil argue with 'communists', i want to know how free they are without being self rightious, i know where i stand, get wise.

    Or else we could be pushing shite uphill/maybe/get busy.
     
  19. backtothestoneage

    backtothestoneageMember Forum Member


    11

    0

    0

    Nov 15, 2009
     
    Having a good time all the time!!! Seriously!!! Sorry if that sounds silly but thats what it means to me....living it the fuck up in total freedom with mutual respect and understanding I guess.
     
  20. ASA

    ASAExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    and i rest my case....haha
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - anarchyForumDate
Political views, anarchy and moreGeneral DiscussionApr 5, 2019
A Is For AnarchyAnarchism and radical activismFeb 20, 2016
How do you intoduce Anarchy to a white sheep?General political debatesJan 25, 2016
Rad website, anarchy archivesAnarchism and radical activismApr 12, 2015
Anarchy LiteratureGeneral DiscussionMar 25, 2015