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. Anom

    AnomExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    698

    0

    0

    Dec 21, 2009
     
    To me anarchism of cause is no government but deeper than that it's no authority. This means I don't obey. Nor do I give orders. Ok, I'm not perfect but this is what I strive for. If no one has the right to order anyone else around, we are all equal, brothers and sisters if you will. As we are all equal we want everyone to feel good the way we want our closest friends to feel good, right? So we do what we can for everyone. Yes, a bit utopic here but ultimately this is what I think.
    It also means taking the fight, big and small, and doing so even when it does not give me personal gain. It means standing up for what is right, for one self and for each other.
    Ever since kindergarden I've gotten in trouble for not taking orders from teachers, other grown ups and the "cool kids" and I only a couple of weeks ago got told a story about how my mom had been called to my kindergarden when I was six because I refused to do what I was told. The teacher had told me to draw a tree but I had drawn a squirrel. When they sat me down trying to explain to me what I was supposed to do, thinking I was a bit slow, I had told them that the squirrel sat in the tree. Now this is anarchism at the level of a six year old, later I have gotten fired a lot for not doing what bosses have told me to. Like when I worked in a kitchen and the boss said we could not go to the toilet during working hours and I said if I couldn't do that I'd piss in the kitchen sink instead.
    It's not that I don't do things others ask me to, but if they give me orders... No way.
    So basically, to me anarchism is equality and caring. Oneness.
     
  2. punkmar77

    punkmar77Administrator Staff Member Admin Team Experienced member


    5,440

    82

    621

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    I've been trying to argue this exact point with Jotunbane on another thread, but as usual theoldpunk your eloquence is masterful. Anarchy is a political philosophy to which he replied:

    "Politics is for loosers"
    "And labels is for stupid loosers"
     
  3. SurgeryXdisaster

    SurgeryXdisasterExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    979

    1

    4

    Oct 8, 2009
     
    "Individual personal choices,
    set examples but don't create laws..."
     
  4. back2front

    back2frontExperienced Member Experienced member


    95

    0

    0

    Nov 26, 2009
     
    Aleister Crowley put it well:

    "Do what you will shall be the whole of the law and harm none"

    Anarchism has nothing to do with buying records and going to gigs or wearing awful clothing that went out of date in 1977.

    As another poster said earlier anarchism is about class struggle; about non-coercive, non-hierarchial worker control of society. That's what anarchism is.
     
  5. ASA

    ASAExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    anarchism has everything to do with wearing terrible clothes haha, lotta 'anarchists', tend to forget about liberalism and how its been stolen

    this ain't 1885 no more, can't use those arguments
     
  6. oibobbo

    oibobboActive Member Forum Member


    38

    0

    0

    Jan 15, 2010
     
    anarchy is the freedom to follow anybody like sheep and to behave like an arsewipe...if that's the way you really are ... :lmao:
     
  7. dwtcos

    dwtcosExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    642

    1

    3

    Oct 22, 2009
     
    To me anarchy really starts in the mind. And just like every other creation man has ever made, anything outside of the mind is reflective of whats within it. Therefore I can come to the conclusion that education is the only true way to enstate anarchy because ones people possess liberated minds. The worlds we live in will directly reflect them. I've always seen liberty as some sort of infectious disease that can attack one part of you and then never leave your system. Now we filthy punks (I'm speaking for myself here because I really do smell like trash:) need to spread the disease in any way we can. And one day, The world will reflect it. But there are wrong ways to go about spreading it, like throwing bricks. The more bricks you through the more people who aren't "infected" will turn to the deadly vaccine known as church and state and our world will continue to reflect the vaccine! SO SPREAD THE DISEASE BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!
     
  8. miserablist

    miserablistExperienced Member Experienced member


    91

    0

    0

    Feb 11, 2010
     
    Hi, I'm new here. I've not read the entire thread yet but hope folk don't mind me replying to the OP.
    Anarchy=Communism.
    That's exactly what it is. A system of workplace and community councils networked on a federative basis and completely controlled by those within the councils (i.e. all the workers in a workplace, all the people in a community). Communists and Anarchists basically want the same thing. A classless stateless society where the means of production are communally worked and owned so that all humanity benefit from our collective labour.
    The main difference between commies and anarchists is the means with which we aim to achieve this society, or as close an approximation to it as possible. Communists , in the common sense, seek the seizing of state power in all countries before the individual states withering away to leave communism in place. This is what Marxists refer to when they talk about socialism and the transitional phase.
    Anarchists of course realise, and have been proven right, that not completely destroying the state during a revolution will only lead to power being concentrated in the state and the controlling party as we saw in the USSR and we still see in Cuba and China. To my mind the best way to achieve a revolution that will not descend into totalitarian party rule is to work now to build the structures that we would like to see replace the state. That way as these structures gain in strength and power we, the working class, will be in a stronger position to both win a revolution and to prevent it from being either usurped by authoritarian groups or destroyed by reactionaries like the remains of the ruling class and their lackeys.
    By structures I mean by building up groups in our communities that allow people to work together for their common interest - everything from resisting evictions and rent increases to taking on the local authorities and ensuring the upkeep of our communities/working on communal projects - and building groups in work with our fellow workers so that we can organise in work to protect our interests against our bosses. As well as doing this we need to build networks with other people building such groups to be able to lend mutual aid and share experiences so that we can learn from one another's struggles.
    Of course this all seems a bit class reductionist, as my partner was telling me yesterday, so I would also like to add that anarchism also means the complete destruction of sexism, racism and homophobia. This is as much a part of the class struggle as community and workplace organisation though for practical purposes I think that community and workplace should take priority. Of course in both these fields of activity we end up having to deal with sexism, racism and homophobia. Us humans are a complicated lot aint we? :ecouteurs:

    NB: Anarcho-Capitalism has nothing to do with anarchism whatsoever no matter what semantic games they want to play. Anarchism is and always has been a left wing ideology of the working class. The first mention of anarchy in a political context was made by Thomas Rainsbrough during the Putney Debates in England in the 1600's where he used it to describe the mood of the army who were not happy with having fought to rid themselves of a monarch only to be replacing him with a bunch of idle rich fucks in parliament. Proudhon was the first to take it and use it in a non-pejorative sense to describe himself and his mutualism. The political theory of anarchism was further advanced throughout the 1800's where anarchists played an important part in the formation of the First International until Marx destroyed it.
    "Anarcho-Capitalism" is an oxymoron. Private ownership of the means of production runs contrary to the core of anarchism.That the world, in the words of Gerald Winstanley, is a common treasury for all.
     
  9. ASA

    ASAExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    um many of the things u purport would be imposition of the worst kind, saying there are no sensible alternatives but if wanna live like that without imposing on me, sweetas
     
  10. Drippingsoul13

    Drippingsoul13Member New Member


    6

    0

    0

    Feb 10, 2010
     
    Communism sounds good on paper but in practice it doesn't work. People get greedy
     
  11. miserablist

    miserablistExperienced Member Experienced member


    91

    0

    0

    Feb 11, 2010
     
    @ASA: Are you referring to me? Because what I outline is anarchism. There would be no imposition. People would be free to move around until they found the right community for them and what not. These councils are all based upon free association so there is no coercion, well aside from the subtle social coercion that stops people being dick. You know the whole social animal thing generally stopping blokes going around raping everyone in sight and it human society being a blood bath. ;)

    @Drippingsoul13: Could you back that up with some evidence rather than a blanket assertion? Could you also give some evidence of where communism has failed because "People get greedy"? See that sounds like 'common sense' to me and my experience of common sense is that it is generally wrong, very, very wrong.
     
  12. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    2,342

    5

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 41 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    every where that communisim has existed it has failed because of people getting greedy. Name one form of communism where there wasn't somebody on top who made millions off the suffering and deaths of others. Communist would need no leaders to work properly, instead of idiots like Stallin and Kim Jong Ill enforcing communist regimes.
     
  13. miserablist

    miserablistExperienced Member Experienced member


    91

    0

    0

    Feb 11, 2010
     
    Just a quick response, will post more later. The USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba etc... aren't/weren't communist. The most famous flourishing of communism/anarchism was during the Spanish revolution. They suffered a military defeat but the implementation of communist modes of production was far superior to those of the USSR.
     
  14. Knox

    KnoxNew Member New Member


    4

    0

    0

    Feb 12, 2010
     
    Simply Anarchism to me is no one having control over what you do. Where everyone can do what they want to, wether it be dropping some E or or marrying the same gender. Everyone can do their own thing and is free to live how they want to live, under their own rule.
     
  15. miserablist

    miserablistExperienced Member Experienced member


    91

    0

    0

    Feb 11, 2010
     
    During the Spanish Civil War and Revolution the anarcho-syndicalist union, the largest in Spain at the time, facilitated the take over by the workers of large parts of the country. Workplaces were run by the workers with no individual in charge and run by councils, women emancipated themselves, and the streets ran with liquor. OK I'm making it up about the liquor. There have been other flourishings of communism throughout history but they are generally smashed by the power of the state rather than being betrayed by the party. That is what happened in Russia and so that is always going to be held up to say "see communism doesn't work". To which the instant reply is "and capitalism does?".
    Just out of interest, not having a go at you, but if you don't think communism can work why are you posting on an anarcho-punk messaging board? I'm really not having a go, just curious is all.
     
  16. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    2,342

    5

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 41 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    I have zero interest in communism, Zilch, zip. I post here because I want NO GOVERNMENT, as that is what anarchism is to me. I want people to be able to live their own lives their own ways (as long as it doesn't impede on others) with out any authority. To me, this whole 'you have to have communism to have anarchism' is a load of BS. I want no government period, not a different form, not some noble leader, not a committee. I want to be able to go disappear in the woods and live off the land if i so choose. No land ownership, no capitalism. If people want to start their own tribes or councils, then that is fine as long as I am free to ignore them. I realize this sounds self centered, since I'm saying what I want, but it is what I want for everyone else as well, the freedom to live as they choose. If they choose to be foolish and start their own governments, then anarchism has failed.
     
  17. PitGirrrl

    PitGirrrlMember New Member


    5

    0

    0

    Feb 7, 2010
     
    i'm not going to stick my face in someone else's debate,
    only give my answer to the original post.

    my mom works in an office, doing paperwork and such for my dad's construction business. i go along and help her most days, and here is what i see: government issued requirements. people, 'free' american people, being required to keep boxes and boxes and boxes of documents, records, receipts, you name it. it makes me SICK to my stomach. it is a waste of space, paper, time, energy, and the human mind. it is a massive burden. just one of many, i'm afraid...

    man, i don't know about you guys, but i just want to live my life. what if i want to sell everything i own and become a traveling street musician? i'm sure the government will still require something of me. keeping record of every breath i take? maybe. that's not freedom. that's bullshit.

    so maybe anarchy is the ability to live life unburdened.
     
  18. Ivanovich

    IvanovichExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    676

    0

    6

    Jan 31, 2010
     
    There vast difference between liberal and totalitarian communism. Not wise to mistake one for the other.
     
  19. sociopop82

    sociopop82Experienced Member Experienced member


    95

    0

    4

    Sep 3, 2009
     
    other than the ideal's i gain from casual conversations on the subject.
    And the various things many people do to uphold personal viewpoints and conduct;; as well as my own.

    i hear alot of lip service.

    Before i get digitally punched in the dick,
    i mean in general.... outside of the nerd box.
     
  20. miserablist

    miserablistExperienced Member Experienced member


    91

    0

    0

    Feb 11, 2010
     
    Sorry about this but
    [​IMG]
    Right. Communism does not require a governement or any individual or group being 'in charge'. THAT is Leninism/Stalinism/Trotskyism NOT Communism. I'm not saying that you have to have communism to have anarchism I am saying they are the same thing. The only difference being the manner with which we seek to get from here to there. Commies seek the seizing of state power before the state withering away, which is BS in my opinion as I'm sure it is in yours, and Anarchists seek to construct the nucleus of the future society in the here and now.
    The society that is desired and talked about by anarchists is, generally, that there is a council in each workplace and community of which everyone is a member that is involved/lives there. These councils are then networked on a federative basis through a system of delegates who hold no power but are strictly mandated by their council. These delegates are also directly recallable if they deviate from their mandate and the position is rotated so that no individual or group can attain power. That is NOT a government. That is anarchism, which is communism.
    And sorry I probably should have used the term libertarian communism but I realise that there are a lot of folk from the US on here and the term libertarian is even more problematic in the American vernacular.
     
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