School Survival Forums
Anarchism. - Printable Version

+- School Survival Forums (http://forums.school-survival.net)
+-- Forum: The Lounge (/forumdisplay.php?fid=34)
+--- Forum: General Talk (/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+---- Forum: Philosophy, Politics & History (/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+---- Thread: Anarchism. (/showthread.php?tid=1453)



Anarchism. - Absnt - 03-17-2011 09:33 AM

I suppose I could be called an anarchist, the problem is, I cannot decide what kind of anarchist I am.

Anarcho-Communism is flawed because compulsory collectivism is fucked up. If I wanted to go build a house, some furniture and a farm and simply live, why should I have to let everyone else come use my shit and vice-versa? That, and when I build this furniture and grow this food, why shouldn't I be able to trade them with others who have done the same?

Anarcho-Capitalism is flawed for obvious reasons. Namely, people will build wealth and power. That, and who's going to enforce the contracts? Apparently hired guns, and I seriously doubt hired guns are going to work... Derp. Also, who's to decide who owns the land? What if one person gets more land than someone else?

So, what do?

Honestly, it doesn't matter. We can debate about that when the government isn't breathing down our necks. We can debate the pros and cons of hundreds of different ideas as much as we want, but it's not going to change shit.

Still, I'll probably never decide on one or the other. Although, anarcho-capitalism has way more flaws than anarcho-communism. I think.


Re: Anarchism. - Rebelnerd - 03-17-2011 12:11 PM

I won't argue that anarcho-communism is flawless. No system is. But I will say this: the compulsory collectivization only affects a small minority, a minority which has a disproportionate share of the wealth. There's no need to feel sorry for them any more than you'd feel sorry for the overthrown politicians. It's the same thing; taking power from people who have too much. Believe me, they're not losing any sleep over how they're going to treat you.

Also, collectivization doesn't necessarily mean that everything is shared. It's more about who controls the means of production. As in, you can still own a car or a computer or a microwave or whatever. You just can't own the factory that makes those things. It's mostly the essentials that would be communally owned, things like food and water and medicine. Most anarcho-communists or even straight-up communists don't really give a shit about someone owning two TV's while their neighbor has one. We're more concerned with the guy who owns the vast electronics corporation that manufactures them.


Re: Anarchism. - Jesusaurisrex - 03-17-2011 01:55 PM

If humans where flawless I would approve of "anarchy". But humans by nature are flawed despicable creatures of violence. Power should be in the hands of an elite forward thinking monarch. The only time it is acceptable to deny and fight the governmental power is when they are coming after and/or trying to kill you.


Re: Anarchism. - Absnt - 03-17-2011 02:06 PM

Jesusaurisrex Wrote:If humans where flawless I would approve of "anarchy". But humans by nature are flawed despicable creatures of violence. Power should be in the hands of an elite forward thinking monarch. The only time it is acceptable to deny and fight the governmental power is when they are coming after and/or trying to kill you.

If humans are inherently flawed, how can we trust an elite forward thinking human monarch? And rebelnerd, I will read more then rethink this.


Re: Anarchism. - Rebelnerd - 03-17-2011 03:05 PM

Read some stuff by Piotr Kropotkin, he was definitely one of the more badass anarcho-commies. Also he had a beard that exceeded the universe's capacity for awesome.