What would your polictical party be? Should we abolish the political spectrum?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I was referring ot "The people who promote things like anarchy or communism can do it because they're inside a society that allows such things to be spoken. Once you actually put it into practice things will change. Eventually totalitarians will arise and you ain't going to have time to say:

"oh, but we can do it this way...." [[BOOM CENSORSHIP]]", I can see that it wasn't clear though.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Though, I don't think that communism looks good on paper at all.

Really? I recall finding the Communist Manifesto to be a rather inspiring vision of what humankind might be capable of if we got rid of some of our more petty problems (not counting the "violent uprising against the bourgeoisie" part). I guess that's really Marxism more than what Communism became.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Better than most people look at you strange and then avoiding you which your ideologue must cause.

I think you mean ideology 313

And it doesn't really since it tends not to come up and when it does I take the time to explain that unlike true idealists I'm more than able to separate ideology from reality. Well that or I put "everyone wants to be helpful so they happily work together" in the place of "then I viciously enslave everyone".

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

Really? I recall finding the Communist Manifesto to be a rather inspiring vision of what humankind might be capable of if we got rid of some of our more petty problems (not counting the "violent uprising against the bourgeoisie" part). I guess that's really Marxism more than what Communism became.

Again...you are Hitler.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think you mean ideology 313

Quiet, 4:40 in the morning.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
And it doesn't really since it tends not to come up and when it does I take the time to explain that unlike true idealists I'm more than able to separate ideology from reality. Well that or I put "everyone wants to be helpful so they happily work together" in the place of "then I viciously enslave everyone".

Well, it doesn't work always. As you can see by inimalist and me repeatedly stating that and ... well...you and others not getting it 😐

Originally posted by Bardock42
Again...you are Hitler.

Brilliant leader. Little bit of the "horribly and irredeemably evil" to go along with it, but fundamentally a great leader.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Quiet, 4:40 in the morning.

Ha, late at night.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, it doesn't work always. As you can see by inimalist and me repeatedly stating that and ... well...you and others not getting it 😐

We just see the truth that you've been blinded to by . . . stuff.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Why? Because it's not total shit I shouldn't be unhappy it? I shouldn't say anything? And I should propose what I think could be done better?

Again, why?

Why not just accept it...nvm.

Well, what are you going to do about it? bitching and moaning...knock yourself out.

Drowning in a glass of water.....typical.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

Whateverthehellism, may have looked great but now apparently remembered only by WD.

I'm the last survivor...what can I say? 313

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Why not just accept it...nvm.

Well, what are you going to do about it? bitching and moaning...knock yourself out.

Drowning in a glass of water.....typical.

Does your argument even make one bit of sense?

Originally posted by Bardock42
You do realize that we live in a political system that strives on people wanting to change things?

Does your argument even make one bit of sense?

Change to a progressive direction NOT into some stupid ideology of Anarchism and other bullshit coffee house snobs dream of happening.

When you wake up from that slumber fantasy land come back here and argue. Otherwise stop wasting people's time with your ramblings. No wonder I don't pay attention to you anymore.

Bah!

god I wish I had the same mature arguing tactics as the people who argue against anarchy...

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Change to a progressive direction NOT into some stupid ideology of Anarchism and other bullshit coffee house snobs dream of happening.

You got a list of what progressive directions are? Besides, it's always in a direction of some ideologie or other. Stupid thing to say.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
When you wake up from that slumber fantasy land come back here and argue. Otherwise stop wasting people's time with your ramblings. No wonder I don't pay attention to you anymore.

Bah!

Oh come on, don't be a child, you never argue, you always just blubber out a few stupid unrelated lines that make everyone scratch their heads as to what idiotic things one can actually think up. ("think" is used very, very loosely here)

Has anyone else noticed that those people claiming anarchy is stupid and immature etc. are themselves immature and stupid.

You'd think they'd be for anarchy.

Originally posted by inimalist
god I wish I had the same mature arguing tactics as the people who argue against anarchy...

There are plenty of good, reasonable arguments against anarchy. The problem is that the people who are pro-anarchy don't see them either as real or as problems.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Has anyone else noticed that those people claiming anarchy is stupid and immature etc. are themselves immature and stupid.

You'd think they'd be for anarchy.

Aren't you like eight, though?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
There are plenty of good, reasonable arguments against anarchy. The problem is that the people who are pro-anarchy don't see them either as real or as problems.

a more correct statement might be that the anarchists in this thread cannot provide in the most specific of detail, largely details most people are unaware of in their own political ideologies, the absolute ways in which an anarchist society would structure security and fund raising.

I don't think anyone is trying to dismiss problems. Saying that the government is not necessary in providing basic services can only be interpreted as dismissal by someone who is already set to believe the state is necessary.

And, though I normally like to stay above this kind of thing, a large percentage of so called arguments have been essentially: "Anarchists are dumb", "Anarchy is silly", "Anarchists want attention", "Anarchists are unrealistic", etc. Believe what you want about the government, but do you really think that people who have conceived of ways of organizing society outside of the bounds of government are silly and dumb? Those are the best descriptive words you can think of for myself?

lol, this is going to sound extremely rhetorical, and I guess it largely is, but my personal involvement in the thread only started after a post was made specifically targeting Bardock and XYZ for their beliefs.

I think another important thing to point out here is that both Bardock and myself, in the first couple of pages, talked about gradual change and pragmatics. Bardock with regard to anarchists working with libertarians, and myself with federalism. Anarchists obviously see the potential problems with the elimination of the state, and want to work to minimize and eliminate them more than they ideologically want to pull down the state. This is largely a distinction between Anarcho-syndicalism, which is revolutionary in nature, and anarcho-capitalism.

bah, I should learn not to get dragged back in, and its unfair to you because I don't have a lot of patience at this point to say anything other than: well, you aren't an anarchist. However, I feel the accusation that we are unwilling to accept potential problems is undeserved. Would it be cool for me to call everyone who isn't an anarchist unimaginative and brainwashed?

Originally posted by Bardock42
You got a list of what progressive directions are? Besides, it's always in a direction of some ideologie or other. Stupid thing to say.

Oh come on, don't be a child, you never argue, you always just blubber out a few stupid unrelated lines that make everyone scratch their heads as to what idiotic things one can actually think up. ("think" is used very, very loosely here)

YouTube video

Now go on and shoo...go away Dr. Utopia!

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
YouTube video

Now go on and shoo...go away Dr. Utopia!

Or the exact opposite...yeah, probably that.

Originally posted by inimalist
a more correct statement might be that the anarchists in this thread cannot provide in the most specific of detail, largely details most people are unaware of in their own political ideologies, the absolute ways in which an anarchist society would structure security and fund raising.

Perhaps, but considering that the system seems largely based on completely voluntary donations and the effective use of money as a motivator those are fairly important questions.

Originally posted by inimalist
And, though I normally like to stay above this kind of thing, a large percentage of so called arguments have been essentially: "Anarchists are dumb", "Anarchy is silly", "Anarchists want attention", "Anarchists are unrealistic", etc. Believe what you want about the government, but do you [b]really think that people who have conceived of ways of organizing society outside of the bounds of government are silly and dumb? Those are the best descriptive words you can think of for myself?[/B]

I'm capable of separating the person from the belief. I know that you and Bardock are intelligent, rational people but I also think that most of the premises you have for whichever of the myriad forms of anarchy you support are largely baseless and as such are silly and dumb.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, this is going to sound extremely rhetorical, and I guess it largely is, but my personal involvement in the thread only started after a post was made specifically targeting Bardock and XYZ for their beliefs.

I do the same thing in the religion forum, just not with them.

Originally posted by inimalist
I think another important thing to point out here is that both Bardock and myself, in the first couple of pages, talked about gradual change and pragmatics. Bardock with regard to anarchists working with libertarians, and myself with federalism. Anarchists obviously see the potential problems with the elimination of the state, and want to work to minimize and eliminate them more than they ideologically want to pull down the state. This is largely a distinction between Anarcho-syndicalism, which is revolutionary in nature, and anarcho-capitalism.

Which is a good place to start and certainly is not an anarchist concept that I had considered before. In fact it helps avoid many of the problems people in general have toward the notion of anarchy.

My disagreement is not about whether humanity would survive a move into anarchy (organized or not) it is simply that people do not have the general mind set or ability to run a society without centralization. Miniarchist policies have some appeal but I don't have enough faith in people as a whole to say that they're going to get along or cooperate without far reaching organization.

Originally posted by inimalist
bah, I should learn not to get dragged back in, and its unfair to you because I don't have a lot of patience at this point to say anything other than: well, you aren't an anarchist. However, I feel the accusation that we are unwilling to accept potential problems is undeserved.

I didn't mean unwillingness to accept problems in general (though I do tend to suspect idealists of that), just that the problems people bring up are generally dismissed with canned nonsense that fails to really address the question.

Originally posted by inimalist
Would it be cool for me to call everyone who isn't an anarchist unimaginative and brainwashed?

Of course not, unfortunately many anarchist do hold that view and the reverse is just as bad. Unfortunately people on both sides do sometimes take the stance that the other side is not worthy of any regard, much like one finds in the argument between evolution and creation.

Originally posted by Bardock42
A well thought out reply again by one of the best and most intelligent posters on this board.

I thank you. Have a good day.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I thank you. Have a good day.

Welcome.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
There are plenty of good, reasonable arguments against anarchy. The problem is that the people who are pro-anarchy don't see them either as real or as problems.

Aren't you like eight, though?

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
YouTube video

Now go on and shoo...go away Dr. Utopia!

Whoa, you really showed him there, sport.

Going back to the discussion on political parties, like it was on the first page, and first page only.

YouTube video

Pretty awesome actually. I'd vote for them.