The fascist regime that made you a moron: Thanks dJonkey

[oneofsix]

The anarchist answer is a society in which any rules are agreed on 100% by the members of that society ... it does not mean No Government or social rules - it means a consensus Governemtn with consensus rules ... a simple majority is not sufficient ...

FFS how the hell do they ever expect to do anything? 100% agreement I can understand why you require more than a simple majority, what with lynch mob mentality and the sort, but likewise you will never get 100% and therefore you end up with no government.

[Banditbandit]

FFS how the hell do they ever expect to do anything? 100% agreement I can understand why you require more than a simple majority, what with lynch mob mentality and the sort, but likewise you will never get 100% and therefore you end up with no government.

I think you should note that I said in the post that this was a pipe dream ...

[oneofsix]

I think you should note that I said in the post that this was a pipe dream ...

well in the post script actually Duly noted. Have they got a practical solution?

[Ocean1]

When you smash the state why on earth would you impose another state ...

No anarchist would.

Anarchism is defined as a political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful

The anarchist answer is a society in which any rules are agreed on 100% by the members of that society ...

No idea where you got that from, but it’s complete bollox, any form of social governance is anathema to an anarchist.

I hope you’re not a social studies of history teacher.

[Banditbandit]

well in the post script actually Duly noted. Have they got a practical solution?

Naaa ... maybe a radical plural democracy a la Mouffe and Laclau ... but most accept that a truly anarchist society is a utopian dream ...

No anarchist would.

No idea where you got that from, but it’s complete bollox, any form of social governance is anathema to an anarchist.

You are wrong - it is anathema only to some forms of anarchy ... Seems some rerading to improve your knowledge of the poltical system you espouse ... go to these two first ...


http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/anarchism/index.html


http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/rbr/noamrbr2.html

I hope you’re not a social studies of history teacher.

Naa ... neither of those ... think tertiary - not secondary (Tho' yeah, history is taught at tertiary level - social studies is not)

[Ocean1]

You are wrong - it is anathema only to some forms of anarchy ...

So you found some communists who liked the racy image of anarchism. Congratulations.

I'll stick with the mainstream definition, ta.

Naa ... neither of those ... think tertiary - not secondary (Tho' yeah, history is taught at tertiary level - social studies is not)

Thank fuck for that, although in hindsight I'd say most secondary school kids could spot the flaws in your delivery.

[avgas]

[mashman]

FFS how the hell do they ever expect to do anything? 100% agreement I can understand why you require more than a simple majority, what with lynch mob mentality and the sort, but likewise you will never get 100% and therefore you end up with no government.

We don't have 100% agreement now, t'would seem silly to believe that we'd ever get 100% agreement. Still don't mean we can't do things better though

[BoristheBiter]

We don't have 100% agreement now, t'would seem silly to believe that we'd ever get 100% agreement. Still don't mean we can't do things better though

But what you class as better I would not.

[mashman]

But what you class as better I would not.

If you have everything you have and everything you want to have, a better healthcare system, a better use of resources, an almost crime free country and access to more time with which to spend how you choose, you wouldn't class that as better?

[BoristheBiter]

If you have everything you have and everything you want to have, a better healthcare system, a better use of resources, an almost crime free country and access to more time with which to spend how you choose, you wouldn't class that as better?

Yes but your way of getting the required resources for this is WAY different from mine.

[mashman]

Yes but your way of getting the required resources for this is WAY different from mine.

True. Mine would involve much less death though.

[BoristheBiter]

True. Mine would involve much less death though.

And mine would mean people working.

[Banditbandit]

So you found some communists who liked the racy image of anarchism. Congratulations.

I'll stick with the mainstream definition, ta.

See .. you're not too far off the mark really - but you are still wrong. Anarchism was once also called Libertarian Communism ... but Capitalist and Communist theorists, fearing the power of Anarchy, ganged up on the concept and declared it the same as chaos - a politrical process with no system adn no controls ... a chaotic system ... they were wong ... but their definition and ideas about anarchy have become what you call "mainstream" .. that is simply part of the hegemonic processes of the dominant elites ... the dominant ideas of any society are the ideas of the dominant class (again, pure Marx)

So when you claim "freedom of thought" you have actually bought into the ruling elites definitions ... and are therefore their captive and their tool ... and you know what that is called don't you ...

Thank fuck for that, although in hindsight I'd say most secondary school kids could spot the flaws in your delivery. .

Well, as I was not being a teacher, and as I gave you a very brief response .. you might be right ... any brief summary/precis is goinmg to have flaws . but they will disapear once the fuiller explanation is given.

What I suspect you really mean is that you disagree with me - which I can accept, but that is not the same as have flaws .. . disagreement is based on a much more fundamental difference in worldview and expectations ... and not necessarily on logical argument ... the acceptance of the overriding power of logic, or its non-acceptnace, is part of the worldview ... And then within that worldview the cogency of the base assumptions on which the argument rests.

[BoristheBiter]

So when you claim "freedom of thought" you have actually bought into the ruling elites definitions ... and are therefore their captive and their tool ... and you know what that is called don't you ...

.

Or you have bought into theirs?

I think you are so wrong to bring you back to some form of normality would entail far more time and experience than I am willing to spend on you.

And really you do make me laugh.