Depends if you are anarcho-capitalist or a social anarchist.
Anarcho-capitalism would just be a descent into massive slave owning corporations using free labor. There is no way for capitalism to co-exist with anarchism without slavery becoming widespread.
Social anarchism seems possible. I can't see why it wouldn't work.
because in social anarchism food becomes currency. and we need currency to get food... do you understand?
you can not buy food with food so the only real survivors are people who are farmers, fishers, hunters. people not of business or industy but only people who are self suficiant.
of course i asume there would be gang survivors aswell. "pay us a tribute and we wont kill you." edventually small governments would form. over time the anarchy just becomes a large amount of many small countries.
famine, disease, crime, war. the reason why any anarchy doesn't work is endless. furthermore anarchy is fleeting. the world evolved out of anarchy and it would do so again with new probably worse governments.
my advice is move your ass away. the united states blow balls. why would anyone want to live there?
You seem to believe anarchy means chaos when most often anarchists use it to define a nation without a central government. If we believed in out right chaos then we would simply refer to ourselves as chaosists and be done with it.
You obviously didn't even bother to look up social anarchism. For this I hold your vapid attack on a straw man version of anarchist thought to be contemptible while you yourself are beneath contempt. Also your premises are laughable beyond that, as if "famine, disease, crime and war" don't happen with states, most often these things are a product of a state.
I'm sorry you have mistaken me for someone that gives shit about what you believe. You see unlike you I don't have some pathetic need for others to think as I do, anarchy get it?
Wow, you are still hurting about this after two months?
This just makes me feel sad for you.
There is no discussion to be had here. I wouldn't want to convince you, I would not want someone with your level of ability to support what I believe because you are detriment to whichever cause you support. In reality I encourage you to continuing supporting whatever it is you support, so as to not saddle whatever anarchists there are in your area with your lack of imagination.
wow... you seriously are foolish if you think that people can govern themselves. sure governments are soulless entities but the world will just not run in any form of anarchy because it's almost as stupid as you are.
I've got guns you've got food... guess who dies in the end?
Is it normal to be an anarchist?
← View full post
Depends if you are anarcho-capitalist or a social anarchist.
Anarcho-capitalism would just be a descent into massive slave owning corporations using free labor. There is no way for capitalism to co-exist with anarchism without slavery becoming widespread.
Social anarchism seems possible. I can't see why it wouldn't work.
--
Leviathanel
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
because in social anarchism food becomes currency. and we need currency to get food... do you understand?
you can not buy food with food so the only real survivors are people who are farmers, fishers, hunters. people not of business or industy but only people who are self suficiant.
of course i asume there would be gang survivors aswell. "pay us a tribute and we wont kill you." edventually small governments would form. over time the anarchy just becomes a large amount of many small countries.
famine, disease, crime, war. the reason why any anarchy doesn't work is endless. furthermore anarchy is fleeting. the world evolved out of anarchy and it would do so again with new probably worse governments.
my advice is move your ass away. the united states blow balls. why would anyone want to live there?
--
SuperBenzid
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You seem to believe anarchy means chaos when most often anarchists use it to define a nation without a central government. If we believed in out right chaos then we would simply refer to ourselves as chaosists and be done with it.
You obviously didn't even bother to look up social anarchism. For this I hold your vapid attack on a straw man version of anarchist thought to be contemptible while you yourself are beneath contempt. Also your premises are laughable beyond that, as if "famine, disease, crime and war" don't happen with states, most often these things are a product of a state.
--
Leviathanel
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Leviathanel
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
so tell me oh wise one. how is a large community like a city going to survive without some sort of commercialism to bring food out of the country?
--
SuperBenzid
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I'm sorry you have mistaken me for someone that gives shit about what you believe. You see unlike you I don't have some pathetic need for others to think as I do, anarchy get it?
--
Leviathanel
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
this has nothing to do with impression foolish one.
it's just a matter of you being wrong and stupid and me pointing it out. just ask yourself how the over-populated country is going to feed its self?
--
SuperBenzid
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Wow, you are still hurting about this after two months?
This just makes me feel sad for you.
There is no discussion to be had here. I wouldn't want to convince you, I would not want someone with your level of ability to support what I believe because you are detriment to whichever cause you support. In reality I encourage you to continuing supporting whatever it is you support, so as to not saddle whatever anarchists there are in your area with your lack of imagination.
wow... you seriously are foolish if you think that people can govern themselves. sure governments are soulless entities but the world will just not run in any form of anarchy because it's almost as stupid as you are.
I've got guns you've got food... guess who dies in the end?