A case for Anarchism

[Landon Caeli]

Again, you're still not telling us anything about what might be good in anarchism. Adding a list of obscure philosophers does not help.

Wouldn't it force a sense of social responsibility upon people? Knowing that there was no 'big brother' intervening in anyone's life? Maybe people would see each other as fellow citizens, and an actual culture would develop with the absence of the political party's standing in our way preventing that from happening.

How can we say, since it's never been tried in the history of man on earth?

 

[Landon Caeli]

In fact even with monkeys and other basic animals there's a hierarchical leadership... We're acting like animals still.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Wouldn't it force a sense of social responsibility upon people? Knowing that there was no 'big brother' intervening in anyone's life? Maybe people would see each other as fellow citizens, and an actual culture would develop with the absence of the political party's standing in our way preventing that from happening.

Social responsibility? I don't know. How would it?

What would you be a citizen of? Do countries still exist? If they do, do they have governments?

We *do* have a culture. (Many of them.) Political parties don't stand in the way of culture.

How can we say, since it's never been tried in the history of man on earth?

Ahh, just like true communism.

 

[Hans Blaster]

In fact even with monkeys and sealions there's a hierarchical leadership... We're acting like animals still.

We are animals, fellow mammal.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

We are animals, fellow mammal.

Yeah. You are right. And the pot has no advantage over the kettle.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Social responsibility? I don't know. How would it?

What would you be a citizen of? Do countries still exist? If they do, do they have governments?

We *do* have a culture. (Many of them.) Political parties don't stand in the way of culture.



Ahh, just like true communism.

Still, I'm asking people to steel-man this idea, by helping me build my case rather than argue against it... Different, I know.

"Different" is hard for a lot of people.

The Steel Man Technique: How To Argue Better And Be More Persuasive

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yeah. You are right. And the pot has no advantage over the kettle.

Pots and kettles are tools for different types of cooking. Humans are mammals.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Still, I'm asking people to steel-man this idea, by helping me build my case rather than argue against it... Different, I know.

"Different" is hard for a lot of people.

The Steel Man Technique: How To Argue Better And Be More Persuasive

WHAT IS IT!

I don't know what you want me to steel man. Give me something to work with besides "anarchy".

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

Pots and kettles are tools for different types of cooking. Humans are mammals.

OK, point taken.

 

[jacks]

In the spirit of "Steel Man...."

I think the article referenced in the OP does of a good job of explaining what is meant by "Anarchy". (Which was news t me.) Most notably it is not the rejection of all governmental institutions only what is referred to as the "State".

‘The state’ really refers to the professional apparatus of people who are set aside to manage society, to preempt the control of society from the people”.

"Referencing Proudhon, Miller agrees that states are both ‘coercive’ and ‘punitive’, reducing people’s freedom “far beyond the point required by social co-existence” and “enacting restrictive laws and other measures which are necessary, not for the well-being of society, but for [the state’s] own preservation” (Anarchism, p.6). Additionally, states inflict “cruel and excessive penalties on those who infringe its laws, whether or not those laws are justified in the first place.”

If this is the case then it seems plausible to me that it could be a working model of government.

 

[dqhall]

Why isn't it practical? Is it because humanity is shameful, and *needs* to be subjected to a higher worldly authority?

You need some organizational skills, if you are to get anarchists to agree to the building of roads, bridges, airports, etc. Some will not want to pay taxes, others will want gun control laws.

 

[Robban]

Wouldn't it force a sense of social responsibility upon people? Knowing that there was no 'big brother' intervening in anyone's life? Maybe people would see each other as fellow citizens, and an actual culture would develop with the absence of the political party's standing in our way preventing that from happening.

How can we say, since it's never been tried in the history of man on earth?

Samuel succeeded Eli as leader of the Jewish people,

after ten years under Samuels guidance, the people approached him with the request,

"Appoint for us a king....like all the nations around us."

Is not "holy" meaning set apart, do not do as the other nations do.

Example,
Esther 3:8

 

[Landon Caeli]

We *do* have a culture. (Many of them.) Political parties don't stand in the way of culture.

The political party's not only pit one culture against the other, but they also divide the individual cultures up against themselves.

They are destructive institutions. This is what they've evolved into over time.

 

[FireDragon76]

Noam Chomsky is the most prominent American anarchist intellectual I can think of at the moment.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Noam Chomsky is the most prominent American anarchist intellectual I can think of at the moment.

Could you provide a reference for that? I've never heard of him being called an anarchist before. Leftist, of course, but anarchist, not yet.

 

[FireDragon76]

Could you provide a reference for that? I've never heard of him being called an anarchist before. Leftist, of course, but anarchist, not yet.

He's a left libertarian, which is usually where leftist anarchism fits in.

 

[Hans Blaster]

He's a left libertarian, which is usually where leftist anarchism fits in.

But has he explicitly promoted anarchism?

 

[All Englands Skies]

Not exactly. This is a mind expansion experiment. I asked people in the OP to share and contemplate *positive* qualities of Anarchism.

You guys are supposed to be helping me make my case.

Mankind is flawed, God is above all mankind politics.

However we still live in a flawed world and partake in flawed systems, so it's obvious, most people match up to an earthly world view to some degree.

Thus, I came to describe myself a Christian Syndicalist and feel my ideals are the best way to serve God, to attempt in my part to make a better world for us to live in and the power of the masses against the greedy and powerful and a duty to the weakest of our society, however, I am not naive enough to believe a "Utopia" can ever be created within our flawed world or our human ability.

 

[All Englands Skies]

He's a left libertarian, which is usually where leftist anarchism fits in.

Chomsky uses terms like Anarcho-Syndicalism and Left-Libertarian to describe what he feels he is closest to politically, however he is not hung up on the terms and does not consider them 100% defining on his views, in fact I think he prefers to avoid labels, however has to use them to roughly describe his views.

My view on Chomsky, like many other thinkers, I agree with some of what Chomsky says and disagree with other things he believes.

 

[Ana the Ist]

What I don’t understand is why we think electing sinful men to guide us, will solve our sin nature. That's what I consider a false belief in man over God.

Have you ever considered the top -down perspective is as different from the bottom-up perspective as it could possibly be?