Anarchy

CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
edited May 2009 in A Moving Train
power corrupts. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

one way to avoid that is to spread the power out amongst the people.


structure a system around a non-system.

companies have no more say than the individuals that make them up. no laws governing or protecting anyone, its all about public will. there may need to be some kind of declaration before we begin...to prevent majority rules in situations where the majority is ill informed...but true, absolute democracy, with a socialist environment, leaves no chance for a curruptible official or institution. it ends the evcils of authority.


pure anarchy. the way to go.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    edited May 2009
    spreading the decisions amongst the populace will never be successful...........even the animal kingdom follows a power structure.

    the ants have it figured out......

    pure ant colony. the way to go.
    Post edited by ajedigecko on
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    Commy wrote:
    power corrupts. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

    one way to avoid that is to spread the power out amongst the people.


    structure a system around a non-system.

    companies have no more say than the individuals that make them up. no laws governing or protecting anyone, its all about public will. there may need to be some kind of declaration before we begin...to prevent majority rules in situations where the majority is ill informed...but true, absolute democracy, with a socialist environment, leaves no chance for a curruptible official or institution. it ends the evcils of authority.


    pure anarchy. the way to go.


    So which is it? Anarchy or give in to a larger government? Because your quote, http://community.pearljam.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=99258&start=30, "the only institution with the authority to end war is the UN, and in order for it implement its policies, the US needs to get in line, to cede a little sovereignty for the common good., but nationalism and pride and rednecks get in the way of that goal, so we may have a ways to go yet." makes me think you don't know where you stand. An anarchist, or anyone with any common sense would never want to conform into a larger government.

    Can you straighten this out for us?
  • KDH12KDH12 Posts: 2,096
    Commy wrote:
    power corrupts. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

    one way to avoid that is to spread the power out amongst the people.


    structure a system around a non-system.

    companies have no more say than the individuals that make them up. no laws governing or protecting anyone, its all about public will. there may need to be some kind of declaration before we begin...to prevent majority rules in situations where the majority is ill informed...but true, absolute democracy, with a socialist environment, leaves no chance for a curruptible official or institution. it ends the evcils of authority.


    pure anarchy. the way to go.


    not going to work on a large scale, with over 300 millions individuals
    **CUBS GO ALL THE WAY IN......never **
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Commy wrote:
    power corrupts. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

    one way to avoid that is to spread the power out amongst the people.


    structure a system around a non-system.

    companies have no more say than the individuals that make them up. no laws governing or protecting anyone, its all about public will. there may need to be some kind of declaration before we begin...to prevent majority rules in situations where the majority is ill informed...but true, absolute democracy, with a socialist environment, leaves no chance for a curruptible official or institution. it ends the evcils of authority.


    pure anarchy. the way to go.
    :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: yeah dude what ever you say... anarchy???? are you serious or are you just trying to get attention??????
  • NoKNoK Posts: 824
    Gaddafi tried to implement a system in Libya which gave power to the people. The system had a lot of flaws and the fact that he would not relinquish power was pretty much pissing on the system he tried to set up but it was interesting nonetheless. I'm no expert on it but I think he tried to structure the state as a web of communities which form some kind of power hierarchy.
  • musicismylife78musicismylife78 Posts: 6,116
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.
  • musicismylife78musicismylife78 Posts: 6,116
    ajedigecko wrote:
    spreading the decisions amongst the populace will never be successful...........even the animal kingdom follows a power structure.

    the ants have it figured out......

    pure ant colony. the way to go.


    such is the great paradox of humanity. We continue a lifestyle and way of life that is completely unsustainable, unhealthy, and against nature. Yet, we continue down this route, not driving cautiously. But barreling down the highway.

    Capitalism and civilization will never be successful either. They are contrary to nature. our way of life is murdering the planet.
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.

    Capitalism has worked and it will always work unless people abuse it. You sound like a big hypocrite if you ask me .If you support this Green anarchy or whatever it is you want to call it.why dont you go sell all your shit and go live on some deserted island with commy somewhere
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    ajedigecko wrote:
    spreading the decisions amongst the populace will never be successful...........even the animal kingdom follows a power structure.

    the ants have it figured out......

    pure ant colony. the way to go.


    such is the great paradox of humanity. We continue a lifestyle and way of life that is completely unsustainable, unhealthy, and against nature. Yet, we continue down this route, not driving cautiously. But barreling down the highway.

    Capitalism and civilization will never be successful either. They are contrary to nature. our way of life is murdering the planet.
    people now sustain themselves, are healthy, and are more aware of their environment........that is why we live longer.

    civilization will never be successful????? what is the current world population, approximatly 6billion?
    capitalism is successful.......the problem is, the level at which someone finally thinks that they are successful.

    i have several friends who own their own business.......they are successful, not "millionare successful" but they are able to pay their bills and feed their family.
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • Brisk.Brisk. Posts: 11,566
    I dont know about Capitalism, it's all about making profit and getting the most out of something you can. Therefore someone has to loose out and someone has to win more. When man's greed for an increasing ridiculous amount of money stops maybe we could try another system.
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    I BrisK I wrote:
    I dont know about Capitalism, it's all about making profit and getting the most out of something you can. Therefore someone has to loose out and someone has to win more. When man's greed for an increasing ridiculous amount of money stops maybe we could try another system.
    "ridiculous amont of money"..........it is easy to make this statement because we do not make the kind of money you are referring to.

    those of us who do not make alot of money, for whatever reason, we attempt to understand and imply that it is immoral for that person to have a ridiculous amount of money, when in all actuality, the person may be doing good with their money. they may be helping organizations or starting foundations to assist others.

    charles koch........comes to mind, i worked for his company and met him. the only billionare i have ever given a high five too.
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Commy wrote:
    power corrupts. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

    one way to avoid that is to spread the power out amongst the people.


    structure a system around a non-system.

    companies have no more say than the individuals that make them up. no laws governing or protecting anyone, its all about public will. there may need to be some kind of declaration before we begin...to prevent majority rules in situations where the majority is ill informed...but true, absolute democracy, with a socialist environment, leaves no chance for a curruptible official or institution. it ends the evcils of authority.


    pure anarchy. the way to go.
    If everyone had a say, nothing would ever get done. People would just debate with each other the rest of their lives.
  • KDH12KDH12 Posts: 2,096
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.


    so why do have a computer and use the internet...... if you are going to go back to hunting and gathering

    I also hope you don't drive a car, fly in airplanes or got to Pearl Jam shows
    **CUBS GO ALL THE WAY IN......never **
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.
    Aw hell no!


    Getting rid of civilization and technology means getting rid of art, creativity, ways to express ourselves, challenge our minds.. you don't have time for that shit when you are hunting an gathering. You work to stay alive 24/7, make as many babies as you can and die a young age.

    No thank you. I will fight to the death to keep civilization alive! No way I'm living in a hunting and gathering world.
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.
    Aw hell no!


    Getting rid of civilization and technology means getting rid of art, creativity, ways to express ourselves, challenge our minds.. you don't have time for that shit when you are hunting an gathering. You work to stay alive 24/7, make as many babies as you can and die a young age.

    No thank you. I will fight to the death to keep civilization alive! No way I'm living in a hunting and gathering world.
    wimp.
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    ajedigecko wrote:
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.
    Aw hell no!


    Getting rid of civilization and technology means getting rid of art, creativity, ways to express ourselves, challenge our minds.. you don't have time for that shit when you are hunting an gathering. You work to stay alive 24/7, make as many babies as you can and die a young age.

    No thank you. I will fight to the death to keep civilization alive! No way I'm living in a hunting and gathering world.
    wimp.
    I'd like to thank society for keeping these nuts at bay by limiting them to only expressing their opinions on a pearl jam message board. :D

    Seriously, go live in the wild for a week.. these people will be back in society on their computers after a few days with a new revelation about life.
  • justamjustam Posts: 21,412
    I think all groups of people need to be organized somehow.
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    justam wrote:
    I think all groups of people need to be organized somehow.
    Into 6 billion different groups? ;)
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    I'd like to thank society for keeping these nuts at bay by limiting them to only expressing their opinions on a pearl jam message board. :D

    Seriously, go live in the wild for a week.. these people will be back in society on their computers after a few days with a new revelation about life.[/quote]

    correct........seems that most people who want to eliminate, are the people who have never experienced what they want to establish.

    if you get time..........check out the program on discovery called "out of the wild"..good show.
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    ajedigecko wrote:
    I'd like to thank society for keeping these nuts at bay by limiting them to only expressing their opinions on a pearl jam message board. :D

    Seriously, go live in the wild for a week.. these people will be back in society on their computers after a few days with a new revelation about life.

    correct........seems that most people who want to eliminate, are the people who have never experienced what they want to establish.

    if you get time..........check out the program on discovery called "out of the wild"..good show.[/quote]


    You should check out expedition Africa :shock:
  • musicismylife78musicismylife78 Posts: 6,116
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.
    Aw hell no!


    Getting rid of civilization and technology means getting rid of art, creativity, ways to express ourselves, challenge our minds.. you don't have time for that shit when you are hunting an gathering. You work to stay alive 24/7, make as many babies as you can and die a young age.

    No thank you. I will fight to the death to keep civilization alive! No way I'm living in a hunting and gathering world.


    Huh? Getting rid of technology stifles creativity? Thats a lie. Technology is useful. Even the staunchly anti technology Radiohead uses it. But I dont see how the proliferation of computers and cell phones and all that is a good thing.

    I will be fighting with you, but to bring about the death of civilization. I mean the whole term is a joke. Do we really think of ourselves as civilized? The same culture that slaughted Native Americans, that lynched blacks, that used the Atomic Bomb, that gave black men syphillis, that perpetuates a racist justice system that throws over 1 million black men in jail, most for nonviolent drug offenses? Are we really going down that road and saying we are civilized.
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    so we would be civilized if we didnt arrest and prosicute those who broke laws. :? So I guess we should just let people do whatever it is they feel like doing such as looting raping women, killing someone just for the hell of it. :? :roll:
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    JB811 wrote:
    Commy wrote:
    power corrupts. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

    one way to avoid that is to spread the power out amongst the people.


    structure a system around a non-system.

    companies have no more say than the individuals that make them up. no laws governing or protecting anyone, its all about public will. there may need to be some kind of declaration before we begin...to prevent majority rules in situations where the majority is ill informed...but true, absolute democracy, with a socialist environment, leaves no chance for a curruptible official or institution. it ends the evcils of authority.


    pure anarchy. the way to go.


    So which is it? Anarchy or give in to a larger government? Because your quote, http://community.pearljam.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=99258&start=30, "the only institution with the authority to end war is the UN, and in order for it implement its policies, the US needs to get in line, to cede a little sovereignty for the common good., but nationalism and pride and rednecks get in the way of that goal, so we may have a ways to go yet." makes me think you don't know where you stand. An anarchist, or anyone with any common sense would never want to conform into a larger government.

    Can you straighten this out for us?



    sure.


    nationalism is a disease. its the idea that my country is better than your country so i'm gonna come and impose my will on your people. its the idea that were' better than others so we can treat them how3ever we want.


    democracy is a good thing. I would like to see a world without borders, but since that is a long way off, you need a check on the nations that think they can get away with anything, nations like Israel and the US.


    The idea is to prevent genocides, to prevent holocausts, to prevent war. had we a functioning UN hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's could still be alive today. there is need for a UN, as long as nationalism is still alive.


    ideally we erase all borders, and end all governments....but even under pure anarchy you're going to need some structure, some forms of institutions to ensure things don't get out of hand. a gloabl group of democratically elected individuals in charge of a military, to prevent some random group of people form taking over the world
  • AusticmanAusticman Posts: 1,327
    There will always be some kind of order or organisation. Pure anarchy is a myth. As soon as arnarchy is declared there will be councils and organisations like that formed to look after their own interests and that will encroach on someone elses interests and without the law to settle these disputes things will get ugly very quickly. What we need is law reform. The crime commited needs to be taken into account and an appropriate sentence handed down. Not like we have at the moment where the length of time you spend in gaol for your crimes is dependent on how much money you have to spend on lawyers and how many glowing references you can get from fine upstanding members of your community.
    I can't go the library anymore, everyone STINKS!!
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    i agree to some extent. organized anarchy is the ideal goal. which i should have mentioned earlier.


    things like corporations....democratize them to the fullest, each individual, from the janitor to the CEO, should have equal say in how things go down-and should have equal pay based on company profits.

    so in that sense, institutions will still exist-even government to some extent, but the idea is to give as much power to the people as is logically possible.
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.
    Aw hell no!


    Getting rid of civilization and technology means getting rid of art, creativity, ways to express ourselves, challenge our minds.. you don't have time for that shit when you are hunting an gathering. You work to stay alive 24/7, make as many babies as you can and die a young age.

    No thank you. I will fight to the death to keep civilization alive! No way I'm living in a hunting and gathering world.


    Huh? Getting rid of technology stifles creativity? Thats a lie. Technology is useful. Even the staunchly anti technology Radiohead uses it. But I dont see how the proliferation of computers and cell phones and all that is a good thing.

    I will be fighting with you, but to bring about the death of civilization. I mean the whole term is a joke. Do we really think of ourselves as civilized? The same culture that slaughted Native Americans, that lynched blacks, that used the Atomic Bomb, that gave black men syphillis, that perpetuates a racist justice system that throws over 1 million black men in jail, most for nonviolent drug offenses? Are we really going down that road and saying we are civilized.
    Dude.. without civilization, you will have no time for art and creativity and very limited tools. Art and creativity are a spawn of civilization.. just try to write and record music, film a movie, or even paint without a roof over your head and electricity.

    Civilization began with the growing of crops and domesticated animals. So in simple terms if you plan on growing a plant or owning a cow, then you are civilized. Do you seriously believe everyone needs to live like Bear Grylls from Man vs. Wild for everything to be acceptable???

    Native Americans were civilized by definition. They grew crops, raised livestock, traded, built communites.. Hell the Mayans built a freakin empire! Humans have been civilized for thousands of years! To my knowledge, uncivilized humans have never existed on the North American continent. Last time we were uncivilized we had just migrated out of Africa and into the Middle East.

    And our culture killed the Native Americans??? How do you know I'm not of Native American decent? I wasn't around 200 years ago to commit such an act. How am I connected to this act? Our culture is nothing like it was 200 years ago.

    That said, why are you still at your computer? Shouldn't you be hunting for food right now? Stop leaching on civilization and act on your belief already. :P
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Capitalism doesnt work. Flat out. Any attempts to reform it will fail miserably. It cant be reformed. It needs to be destroyed as does civilization. Green Anarchy or Anarcho-primitivism is what I closely adhere to or believe, in that it suggests return to the hunting and gathering days, and getting rid of civlization and technology.

    As you type on a computer plugged into a wireless router running on power from your modern apartment.
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Commy wrote:
    sure.
    nationalism is a disease. its the idea that my country is better than your country so i'm gonna come and impose my will on your people. its the idea that were' better than others so we can treat them how3ever we want.

    democracy is a good thing. I would like to see a world without borders, but since that is a long way off, you need a check on the nations that think they can get away with anything, nations like Israel and the US.

    The idea is to prevent genocides, to prevent holocausts, to prevent war. had we a functioning UN hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's could still be alive today. there is need for a UN, as long as nationalism is still alive.

    ideally we erase all borders, and end all governments....but even under pure anarchy you're going to need some structure, some forms of institutions to ensure things don't get out of hand. a gloabl group of democratically elected individuals in charge of a military, to prevent some random group of people form taking over the world

    Uh... that, by definition, is not anarchy.

    What happens when that democratically elected military decides to perform a few favors for their voters to ensure reelection... or refuses to disarm and turn over the weapons when they are voted out? Welcome to the human animal... a social creature that has social stratification and tribal/clan behavior hardwired into its genes.
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Commy wrote:

    nationalism is a disease. its the idea that my country is better than your country so i'm gonna come and impose my will on your people. its the idea that were' better than others so we can treat them how3ever we want.


    Nationalism, arrogance.. same thing. My baseball team is better than your baseball team. :P


    Don't think of it as a disease, when its a natural part of our genes. Yes it sometimes sucks. Yes we can do things to help "better" it, but we can't deny it is part of us and our evolution.

    Don't get me wrong, I see where you are coming from and feel your frustration.
  • mrveddersonmrvedderson Posts: 784
    without a system in place to maintain order, we would all eventually become murderous cannibals, if left to hunt and gather we would kill everything pretty quickly, we need farms that mass produce cows and chickens and fish, we need a farmer to grow hundreds of acres of corn, these systems dont work because people are not working as a team, too many selfish people who want to live in this world that was built by groups of people working as one, but still think they are the shit, i would say complete suicide for the entire planet would be the only thing that would work to everyones liking.
Sign In or Register to comment.