Hahahahaha! Ok ok lets go with this senerio. So one man or some people in a world of defensless pacifist makes an announcement that every one will obey him/them or die. This perfectly enlightened people hears such petty nonsense and laughs. This entire world of pacifistic people is massacered, until no one is left. (since no one would wager their grounds of intellect. The violent people look around and say what have we done. "We defeated our purpose, and took the most vain action ever." Maybe some commit suicide. Moral of the story, Imperialism is flaud(and self-defeated). And I would doubt that one group of people could take over a whole world of passive people. Theres not enough time in life. Best of all it woulldn't matter if everone died, I mean hey the dinosaurs did.
The Weak don't have to defend themselves, because the Weak are the aggressors. And yes, like all aggressors, the Weak die a thousand deaths. The bigger you are the bigger target you make. Remember this, effeminate death-fear is the root of Male Sexual Inadequacy, and thus the root of our Hierarchical Civilization's latent homo-sexuality. To live in such fear is to NOT be fully alive. Better to experiece walking fully erect as a real Man for a mere hour than to crawl as a Coward for a thousand years.
I'm not going to read through all of this, but Communism, you really don't even know what your name means. Communism IS an economic model, a model at the extreme opposite end of capitalism, where no one owns anything. Read some of Marx's writings. That nice house and car - gone. Communism is for those who refuse to accept responsibility for their own life and want free handouts for living. They refuse to work for what they want. And in case you havnt noticed, every communist county has failed miserabley. USSR? Gone. China? Moving AWAY from communism if you know anything about what's going on over there. Unless of course you want to be like North Korea. It's a failed model. And ANARCHY is the total lack of any government. It's really that simple. Look it up.
It's funny that comes from a person who says: Great. Care to implement that too into your dictionary? Communists usually seperate between "private" and "personal property. By that you assume China has at one point been communist. China is not "moving away" from socialism because " it is a failed model", but because those on the top are enemies of marxism, socialism, and communism. Haven't you heard of the coup? How can I as a human being become a nation? That one sparks my curiousity. Nice is relative. And no, you are wrong. There hasn't been a "communist country". Oh, like... In a dictionary?
That was cute communism. I liked that line by line instant replay of my words. Communism seperates between private and public? Even though communism is "a theory advocating elimination of private property"? How does that work? And yes, you can look "anarchy" up in a dictonary. You should try to refer to it more often before you post. Direct quote: "absence of government" or "a state of lawlessness". There wouldn't be police, because there'd be no laws to break. I'm not really sure why you're still aruging that one. But I'm sure with your intelligence, you'll be the first one to create the "right" communist state. Because the USSR definitly wasn't, well besides the fact that communism was their ideology. Where do you get you're information from, communism? I find your lack of knowledge in history, ideologies, and economic models to be amusing.
The communist movement is struggling for a classless society. This is how communists usually seperate between the so-called private and public property: Private Toothbrush Car House Computer etc. Public/Communally owned (with varying degrees of local control) Means of production (industry, factories, malls, public transportation etc.)
You know, there are a reason why there are complex litterature regarding society. There is a reason for why political scientists exists. If simply "looking up in a dictionary" was enough, there would be no one specializing in political science. Second, dictionaries are too short to describe the foundation and theory of a social system. That is not what anarchists fight for. Thank you. Because you have just showed how backwards it is to refer to a dictionary when we are dealing with social systems. A dictionary might say (and at least one does): "[size=-1]An economic system in which capital is owned by private government." This is false. Again an excellent example of how retarted it is to use a dictionary as "proof". I consider that off-topic and a personal attack. And yet again you are wrong. There is no such thing as a "communist state". What marxists works have you read? [/size] Laws wil always exist, either written or unwritten. For instance, and let's take it to the extreme, placing a bomb in a neighbourhood with the intention of killing people, would not be allowed, nor be tolerated by society. [size=-1] Please point out my lack of knowledge in history, ideologies, and economic models. Perhaps you could correct me. [/size]
Anarchy - in it's purest form - is the total lack of government. Done. That's what it means. Anything else is not anarchism. If an anarchist tells you he's fighting for "private government", then laugh at him, because he has no idea what he's talking about. In an "anarchist" society, there are NO LAWS. PLEASE tell me where you learned that anarchism meant anything else than the lack of law. PLEASE. We'll take this one topic at a time, maybe? Also, can you explain to me what the "anarchists" you know are fighting for so I can try to have a clue as to what model you're talking about.
[size=-1] Please point out my lack of knowledge in history, ideologies, and economic models. Perhaps you could correct me. [/size] If I remember correctly, "an" means something along the lines of "without" or "no". "Archy" derives from Greek arkhein ‘to rule’, arhko ‘I rule’, arkhe ‘rule’. Anarchists are against today's system because capitalism (and class society in general) are based upon the relation of superiors and subordinates, rulers and the ruled.
Communism, you just about agreed with me about what anarchy means. If you put together those, you get: "Without rule" Isn't that what i've been saying all along? Now can you please explain to me what an anarchist stands for? I'm not going to go back through every single one of your posts and point out your mistakes. But for starters, take "anarchism".
Anarchists stand for a classless, stateless society without money or markets. An anarchist is opposed to the divison of human beings. Be it rich or poor, capitalist or worker, President or an ordinary citizen. Anarchists approve of the concept that human beings often have problem controlling themselves. So why should one man rule a million?
I finally get it. You are severely confusing anarchism with communism/socialism. I understand why now, too. You've been reading too much internet shit. You got this from WorldSocialismNow or a site based off that. Anarchy and communism can't go hand in hand for starters because one needs government and the other dosn't believe in it. Also, the classless/stateless thing is a communist/socialist belief.
No, not confusing. Communism and anarchism is the same social system. However, anarchists and communists have different methods of reaching that goal. False. In most cases, I thikn pressumptions are not a very good way to try to gather information. Communism is a classless, stateless society without money or markets. Anarchism is a is a classless, stateless society without money or markets. Where is the difference? Communism is a stateless society. Anarchists are also "socialists", in the way that they also struggle for a classless society. We all do. Anarchists advocate a classless society. Communists advocate a classless society. Socialists advocate a classless society. Have you read any anarchist literature?
this is getting more amusing than anything. please tell me what anarchist literature that you've been reading, if any at all? anarchism and socialism are not the same thing. some forms sometimes have common ideals, but even Piotr Kropotkin reconginsed this. but we are at least in agreement now that anarchism is without government? why the hell were you fighting me about this earlier if you're now agreeing?
Yes. Could you point out where we disagreed with each other on this point? You did not answer my question. To answer yours, I have, discussed a lot with anarchists. I've read a few articles on anarchism. Several anarchist FAQ's. I've also read quit a few pages on the Spanish Civil War. I have read What is Communist Anarchism?, by Alexander Berkman. I've also read parts of Anarchy: A pamphlet, by Errico Malatesta, which I continue to read. And you?
Communism! your back! And this guys one of those weird capitalist anarchists that most anarchists hate hate by the loooks of it. Magic medicine, through out history, most people calling themselves anrchists at least have been operating form the far left.
Here's a few I pulled up for you: Quote MagicMedicine: "absence of government" or "a state of lawlessness". Quote Communism: That is not what anarchists fight for. Post #62 where you again debated it, and post #47 where you talked about police - which wouldnt exist because there'd be no laws. As for my background, I've taken several economic and economic theory classes, as well as my political science classes. It is almost foolish to rely on others and online FAQs for reliable information. Anyone should know all too well how much "correct" information comes from them. Ewan, explain your last post. Far left of what? And what the hell is a capitalist anarchist? Capitalists wan't government to protect their property. Look up libertarian.
a pamphlet.... that's funny..... if there is any organization anarchy is the wrong nomenclature.... figure it out...
