National Service

[Ghogiel]

3). Become an anarchist, bounce from one crappy job that you hate to another just to fill your own stomach, be a burden on the very society that you want nothing to do with. Let "f*** the government! Give me my foodstamps for my 18 kids!" be your motto, and commit yourself to your own despicable selfish interests. And don't be surprised when someone stabs you in your sleep for those 6 dollars and a half-eaten sandwich under the overpass; they were only trying to ensure their own survival and proclaim their importance over yours.

 

Anarchistism is the opposite of relying on the state lol. It is really about ultra capitalism and free market

Which is also why it doesn't work very well in the greater context since those who are successful in a free market want to ensure their continued success and eventually have the resources available to bend the rules in their favor.

 

My foodstamps joke was partly to comment that at the common level, anarchists don't want to contribute to the state, or be governed by the laws, but would happily demand public services when their own ability to support themselves goes to crap (which it usually does).

 

 

I will have to call you out on this broad stroke you have painted all the people who support Anarchism/Voluntarism/Anarcho-Capitiolism/Free-Market with.

 

I'll believe you when you can support this claim that people who support free market and a stateless society have poor ability to support themselves "when their own ability to support themselves goes to crap (which it usually does)"

[JimboUK]

3). Become an anarchist, bounce from one crappy job that you hate to another just to fill your own stomach, be a burden on the very society that you want nothing to do with. Let "f*** the government! Give me my foodstamps for my 18 kids!" be your motto, and commit yourself to your own despicable selfish interests. And don't be surprised when someone stabs you in your sleep for those 6 dollars and a half-eaten sandwich under the overpass; they were only trying to ensure their own survival and proclaim their importance over yours.

 

Anarchistism is the opposite of relying on the state lol. It is really about ultra capitalism and free market

Which is also why it doesn't work very well in the greater context since those who are successful in a free market want to ensure their continued success and eventually have the resources available to bend the rules in their favor.

 

My foodstamps joke was partly to comment that at the common level, anarchists don't want to contribute to the state, or be governed by the laws, but would happily demand public services when their own ability to support themselves goes to crap (which it usually does).

 

 

@Jim_uk

Nobody ever said that the world was perfect, or even worked, but using favors and pulling strings is how a good portion of what does work still manages to get done. That's just the harsh truth regarding any significantly large organization that oversees any finite resource. Merits and capability don't mean much unless you also put forward some bargaining chips and get others to vouch for why you should be considered before others. This is why networking has become so extremely crucial toward any level of success in this day and age.

 

Oh I agree there has always been some level of skullduggery but these days in the UK it's rife, it's started back in 97 when Blair took office and has got progressively worse since, the current PM promised to clean up politics pre election but if anything it's gotten worse. Membership numbers for parties in the UK have been dropping steadily as the main parties became more and more distant from their members, the shortfall in funding has to come from somewhere and thievery has been their answer. In reality we no longer have separate parties with differing ideals, we now just have a political class who seek to rule rather than serve and who spend their time thinking up new and imaginative ways of separating people from their hard earned money, our democracy has become a kleptocracy.

[Vagrant0]

I'll believe you when you can support this claim that people who support free market and a stateless society have poor ability to support themselves "when their own ability to support themselves goes to crap (which it usually does)"

I would instead invite you to mention atleast 10 notable people within the last 20 years who have managed to maintain their beliefs in anarchy and come from a commoner background while still being successful in areas other than art (writing), music, public speaking (comedy, or TV related), or small scale business without just ending up exploiting the system, wedging their way into power through questionable means, or otherwise selling out to "the man" or just becoming "the man", be it the government, or just the large group of corporations that currently run the government. I'll even give bonus points if you can come up with someone of that group who has either contributed large amounts regularly to charity, or has furthered humanity's general well-being in a significant way.

 

 

What it boils down to is that a good amount of whatever civil prosperity any region has usually only happens because someone high up made a backroom deal in order to get something in exchange for promoting that civil cause. While many of these you hear about only get known because they go bad, many others only happen because someone related to that project put away their idealism and decided to just play the crooked system to their advantage, realizing that the crooked system will probably always exist anyway.

[Ghogiel]

I'll believe you when you can support this claim that people who support free market and a stateless society have poor ability to support themselves "when their own ability to support themselves goes to crap (which it usually does)"

I would instead invite you to mention atleast 10 notable people within the last 20 years who have managed to maintain their beliefs in anarchy and come from a commoner background while still being successful in areas other than art (writing), music, public speaking (comedy, or TV related), or small scale business without just ending up exploiting the system, wedging their way into power through questionable means, or otherwise selling out to "the man" or just becoming "the man", be it the government, or just the large group of corporations that currently run the government. I'll even give bonus points if you can come up with someone of that group who has either contributed large amounts regularly to charity, or has furthered humanity's general well-being in a significant way.

 

lol nice try. but you first.

 

And what are you doing trying to put stipulations like that? That's just absurdity.

[Vagrant0]

And what are you doing trying to put stipulations like that? That's just absurdity.

Not at all. Performers and artists are more likely to be able to get away with maintaining views which conflict with how things normally work since a good portion of why they're even famous (and subsequently able to eat) is because they are so outspoken about those views and incorporate them into their works. Since this aspect is more related to sensationalism than actually being affected by a free market, it really doesn't compare with more mundane aspects of business, such as construction, fabrication, retail, banking, or any of those hundreds of other things which society actually needs to function. That is not to say that some of those works may not inspire or help promote something beneficial in that society, but rather that it isn't a significant component in the actual economic and social framework for that society.

 

 

As for me going first... I actually have trouble thinking of any noteworthy individuals who promoted anarchy without ending up signing themselves to RIAA after they got big, or hold views which are closer to Marxism than Anarchy. Meanwhile you have noteworthy groups who are anarchist based who are usually at odds with the law, promoting hate, and amazingly still selling out their name for the sake of licensed products.

 

If there was such a large group of successful anarchists, surely you could think of a couple to point out as role models, rather than have me go around to all the homeless hangouts, take a survey, and post those names here.

[Ghogiel]

And what are you doing trying to put stipulations like that? That's just absurdity.

Not at all.

Yes it is. I think you are trying to draw the bullseye around your shots. You are trying to exclude many unrelated categories of people from your desired sample for no good reason what so ever.

 

 

If there was such a large group of successful anarchists, surely you could think of a couple to point out as role models, rather than have me go around to all the homeless hangouts, take a survey, and post those names here.

I refuse to fish for your red herring. The point is not that I cannot find 10 individuals that fit your tailored criteria, it is that even if I did, it does not in anyway substantiate your original claim. So in doing so would be entirely a pointless exercise.

 

I mean really: what if I cannot find 10 successful knitters in the last 20 years who haven't written books, music, teaching, or work in small scale businesses, then what? Does that mean most knitters are therefore dole groping losers. No it does not.

 

Also about RIAA> So what?

It is entirely in the interests of Anarchists. It's like saying private insurance companies or banks are somehow incompatible with anarchism.

Edited October 9, 2012 by Ghogiel

[ginnyfizz]

Does that mean most knitters are therefore dole groping losers. No it does not.

 

Since I am currently on the dole I strongly resent that statement "dole groping losers". Some of us have worked and paid National Insurance Contributions for years before falling on hard times and running up against age and disability discrimination.

 

And yes, I do knit.

[Dazaster]

Does that mean most knitters are therefore dole groping losers. No it does not.

 

Since I am currently on the dole I strongly resent that statement "dole groping losers". Some of us have worked and paid National Insurance Contributions for years before falling on hard times and running up against age and disability discrimination.

 

And yes, I do knit.

Guess it's jumpers for everyone this Christmas then :thumbsup:. I'll take three ,blue, red and gray all xtra large please :tongue:

[Ghogiel]

Does that mean most knitters are therefore dole groping losers. No it does not.

 

Since I am currently on the dole I strongly resent that statement "dole groping losers". Some of us have worked and paid National Insurance Contributions for years before falling on hard times and running up against age and disability discrimination.

 

And yes, I do knit.

Cool story.

[Vagrant0]

Also about RIAA> So what?

It is entirely in the interests of Anarchists. It's like saying private insurance companies or banks are somehow incompatible with anarchism.

They are, since in the current day and age, such groups are only able to function and maintain any level of superiority by means of government support and being able to pressure congress to pass favorable laws... Which is essentially against the premise of trying to encourage a free market or holding views against government influence since those groups are essentially using government influence to their own benefit and creating an unnatural advantage in their favor.

 

The philosophy of anarchy directly conflicts with those processes that most businesses operate on, this is exactly why you cannot come up with 10 people in business who hold such a philosophy. If you cannot understand the fundamental differences between being famous for being famous with anarchist views, and being someone who actually works for a living holding similar views, then there really isn't much point continuing that discussion.