>>614819 the idea is that everything will just magically work out for the best. Or a slightly better thought out answer i heard once was that everyone's personal self interest would result in the promotion of common good without nay authority needing to Shepard the people. This of course does not work.
Also lets try to come up with a moral justification for dogs.
>They presuppose the innate goodness of human nature. This. It would work if all people were friends which each other and had good will and were charitable etc.. The problem is people aren't like that. That's why anarchism is retarded. Anarchism doesn't survive "rebellions".
>>615010 I though that was pretty funny and googled it. SO many blog posts along the lines of "X reasons why these comics aren't funny" and they're all, ironically enough, complaining about the tiniest implications of 'fat-shaming'. I mean 4chan complains about SJW's a lot bu my god do they have no self awareness?
Name all anarchist writers you know. Most of them will be slav.
There's very good reason for it. And it's also a reason why people influenced by German lifestyle, customs and philosophy(Kant is special in this regard) will have troubles understanding it. >>615096 Orwell sympathised with revolutionary left most of the time, he just hated stalinists.
>>615094 It's not even so much a lack of organization necessarily, because anarchism theory usually devotes a lot of time to explaining methods by which the people might organize themselves. The difference is that these organizing forces are non-governmental and are not founded on the use of coercive force.
Basically the idea is that the state represents one facet of an inherently oppressive system that exploits the labor of and stifles the progress of the working class. Most of the functions that the state holds can be done more effectively and in a manner more representative of the people's will when actually managed by the people themselves.
>>614967 >and in a lot of ways better than the society we have today
You tell me how a complete breakdown of law and order is better than the society we have today.
Guess what? Without a society based on law you've got a society based on what Bubba wants to do with your sweet ass and all your belongings. And if you really think that you'll come out on top in a world like that, that's adorable.
>>614910 It's the same thing that puzzles me about people concerned with social mobility and meritocracy.
Perhaps all they want is just a momentary reset? You know, since the original state is seen as desirable it makes sense trying trying to revert everything back to it, even if it's only for a short while. Maybe a full on anarchist revolution every once in a while is seen as necessary for them? You know, to keep things as close to desirable as possible and to avoid any potential changes which may make it impossible to "restart" things again.
>>614819 Haven't you ever dreamed of putting on masks, taking a car and just riding through the downtown during midnight and crashing in all the symbols of whatever class oppression you can imagine (ie whatever building is high and has lots of glass)? A couple of molotovs here, graffiti there. Maybe put some anarchist posters onto public places. Kick some shit in with a bat. Maybe even throw a bomb into some richfags windows or plant it on his car. Just incite chaos. Never, really?
>>616140 >Haven't you ever dreamed of putting on masks, taking a car and just riding through the downtown during midnight and crashing in all the symbols of whatever class oppression you can imagine (ie whatever building is high and has lots of glass)? A couple of molotovs here, graffiti there. Maybe put some anarchist posters onto public places. Kick some shit in with a bat. Maybe even throw a bomb into some richfags windows or plant it on his car. Just incite chaos. Never, really? yeah but there needs to be richfags to rob
>>616168 Isn't it funny we have all these philosophies and religions allover the world calling people to act morally and not a single ideology that would incite immoral behavior, yet immorality is omnipresent?
Doesn't that imply we're naturally inclined towards the 'bad'?
>>616188 >yeah but there needs to be richfags to rob You don't rob them. That's the point. You kill them and set fire to their possessions. Fuck everything. Anarchy.
>>616198 >Doesn't that imply we're naturally inclined towards the 'bad'? I dunno man, but even if we are, we gotta rise above our baser instincts and use empathy+logic. How would you like it if somebody started smashing your shit just because you have more money than them?
>>616219 >I dunno man, but even if we are, we gotta rise above our baser instincts and use empathy+logic. It was a rhetorical question.
>How would you like it if somebody started smashing your shit just because you have more money than them? I wouldn't. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy being in the position of the aggressor. In fact this does in no way logically deter me. If I am the rich guy I'll do anything I can to keep my shit being pushed in. If I am the poor fuck I'll do anything I can to tip the scales on my side. This is called being rational.
You'll find lots of situations that have multiple parties involved will have one screwing the other while knowing how well it must suck cock to be on the other side of the stick.
>>616240 There's always something unless you're the top dog of the town.
>>616275 >You'll find lots of situations that have multiple parties involved will have one screwing the other while knowing how well it must suck cock to be on the other side of the stick If your friends are jumping off a bridge, would you join them? Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it right.
>>616311 >implying if I got my mates together and crushed through the gates into a richfags villa he'd have anyone there to defend them >implying we wouldn't get to do 20 wonders on them before anyone arrived
>>616362 >i have never not once imagined one day just fucking everything up without a concern for consequences, just disregarding every and any restriction be it moral, legal or personal and just letting loose this ancient primal violent beast residing inside This is 4chan, where people stop pretending shit.
You can arrive at anarchism theoretically a number of ways:
When the state becomes so oppressive the alternative of anarchy seems to become tenable.
The philosophical anarchist position: States typically do not have the legitimate political authority to compel a duty to obey on its citizens. It's technically possible but the criteria are strenuous. I can't remember them, but you can check out A. John Simmons's works. I read his 'Justification and Legitimacy' article.
Then there are anarchist communes where the small enough scale makes accountability to each other (reputation easily disseminates) much more possible. Lots of group pressure to conform though, depending on how much there really is an alleged lack of hierarchy. Though that's not going to work for individualist anarchists who simply don't want to be told what to do, feel like they should be the complete rulers of their own lives etc.
Thread replies: 51 Thread images: 7
Thread DB ID: 473307
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.