EU Referendum Discussion: Well That Worked Out Well Didn't It

[Shimmer.Fade]

I really don't mind if you say the ideals of anarchism are unrealistic and could therefore be dangerous to pursue, that's a perfectly valid opinion. But this here? Come on that's hogwash. :D Ideas and terminology evolve, I could just as well claim that your definition of democracy (presumably) "is a mistake of terminology dating back to some clever people" who broke with the good old greek tradition of excluding women, slaves and immigrants from this 'demos'.

I mean you can publish your own dictionairy with your definition of anarchy, maybe it will catch on. But until then I'm afraid you have to accept that at this moment there is a well known definition of anarchy as an utopian society and that people will use the word as such, whether the term makes sense to you or not.

As Vurtual said, it's great that as an anarchist I can just speak for myself. For me the starting point of all anarchistic thinking is the following. If the state compels you by law to do something that goes completely against your conscience, you have the right to say no. But if I claim for me the right to say no to any law that I object to, then I must grant anyone the right to say no to any law. This means that the only ethical form of government (if you could even call it that) would be one that doesn't enforce laws, but merely gives suggestions to the citizens. Thats what free association is all about, people come together under certain rules because they choose to do so.

I agree with freedom of speech and the evolution of terminology, but you anarchists are doing yourselves a disservice trying to convince people that anarchy is not what they think it is. I could probably be defined as an anarchist in some ways, but I do not wish to be. There are other, more appropriate descriptions of what I believe, and one term could never encompass what I believe.

I believe democracy is named after one of many wonderful philosophers, Democritus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democritus#Ethics_and_politics

His pupil, Epicurus, took his ideas further, and is of great interest to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Shimmer.Fade: I agree entirely about the IMF and ECB - and also with investment banks being an abomination (at least in their current state). As for the Greece, Ireland, etc stuff, check this rather fine piece of German investigative journalism - The Secret Bank Bailout.

Thanks for the link, will check it out tomorrow (or the next day), and let you know what I think

 

[tokezu]

I agree with freedom of speech and the evolution of terminology, but you anarchists are doing yourselves a disservice trying to convince people that anarchy is not what they think it is. I could probably be defined as an anarchist in some ways, but I do not wish to be. There are other, more appropriate descriptions of what I believe, and one term could never encompass what I believe.

I believe democracy is named after one of many wonderful philosophers, Democritus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democr...s_and_politics

His pupil, Epicurus, took his ideas further, and is of great interest to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

But nothing is what we think it is, people should better get used to that! :D As I said in the other thread confusion is a good thing, it makes people think in new ways. And the interesting point in this case is that it is not about changing the definition, it is about rethinking if a society without a goverment could be a good thing. But I wouldn't claim the term anarchism encompasses everything I believe, neither.

I like some of the greek philosophers too, but the point I wanted to make was that the 'democracy' of ancient athens wouldn't pass for a democracy today. Does that mean we need a new term? No, because people are able to recognize in which context a term is used. Just as you can perfectly well recognize in which instance 'anarchy' is meant to mean chaos or utopia.

Edit: Didn't even see that part about the etymology. Democracy comes from δῆμος (demos) meaning people and κρατία (kratia) meaning power or rule not from Democritus, so democracy is meant to mean something like "rule of the people"... now that is an ambiugous term! Your absolutely right that just like "anarchy" it needs further explanation to have any substantial meaning. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't use the term.

 

[One Thousand Words]

Yeah I thought it was longer ago....

Was just going off Busty's mindless comment about chip shops.....

Guess history isnt his strong point either

I don't regret my Arts degree said no barista ever.

 

[gannetsarewe]

Well no wonder I was confused- cos the potato famine ended closer to 200 years ago than 100 years ago i.e ended 1852

That would be The Great Famine or in Irish An Gorta Mor (The Great Hunger), the term Potato Famine is not used in Ireland and may be considered pejorative, though some just call it The Genocide. There was famine in 1879 An Gorta Beag (The Small Hunger), and another Great Famine, Blian an Air(Year of the Massacre) in 1740, when the staple of the people was grain rather than potatoes. The term Potato Famine may be used to distinguish and the great famines of 1845-1852 and 1740, though the terminology is probably academic when you are starving to death. All of the famines were a consequence of British rule in Ireland, something the Empire Nostalgics in Tory Party at the forefront of the Out campaign prefer to ignore.

 

[BlindHelperMonkey]

social liberties

freedoms are held sacrosanct by the right, not the left. have a wash, hippy

 

[spacejunk]

I don't regret my Arts degree said no barista ever.

I don't regret dealing with people's manky teeth for a living. But i'm not a barista, so does that count?

freedoms are held sacrosanct by the right, not the left. have a wash, hippy

Now that Thatcher is finally dead, do you find her more sexually desirable, or less?

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Didn't even see that part about the etymology. Democracy comes from δῆμος (demos) meaning people and κρατία (kratia) meaning power or rule not from Democritus, so democracy is meant to mean something like "rule of the people"... now that is an ambiugous term! Your absolutely right that just like "anarchy" it needs further explanation to have any substantial meaning. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't use the term.

Yes, but he was the first Greek to be referred to as 'Chosen of the People' in Greek. I agree the words existed before the man no doubt, just that he sort of embodied them. There are probably even older words from other societies representing the same idea. Etymology can be quite fun =)

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

freedoms are held sacrosanct by the right, not the left. have a wash, hippy

Why would you assume I am a hippy?

If you assume I am a hippy I will post a picture of a clubhouse I assume you probably call home:

Do you have something constructive to add? Or do you just want to pretend to have a monopoly on freedom not realizing how ironic that is?

 

[F.U.B.A.R.]

As a total philistine, plebeian and ignoramus on the subject of international politics, I am neither willing nor capable of providing any valid contributions to this thread.

Therefore, may I suggest the title be changed to 'Tits! In or oot?' Instead.

This is a topic upon which I feel far better informed, as I might not know my arse from my elbow, but I do know a fine set of bangers when I see them.

Therefore, my vote is 'Tits oot!'

 

[Vurtual]

....I would like to read Global Minotaur if it isn't too dry. I have too much dry/dense stuff to read right now related to my profession to read anything too dry/dense for fun. I'll put it on my Amazon list :D

Edit: and lol at the wobblies being called anarchic. They were a massive union with many, many members of different political affiliations (primarily worker oriented), are unions forms of anarchism?

I also feel Chomsky is talking about something different than 'anarchism', he just wants people to be able to understand him, and he is working with an imperfect vocabulary. Do I really need to go back to the times way before philosophical anarchism existed to find these philosophies under different names? What I mean is that these ideas and philosophies existed long before the term 'anarchism', and referring to these philosophies independently allows them more freedom of application.

Noam Chomsky on Anarchism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_Bv2MKY7uI

We are most definitely on the same side.

(been away from laptop) - I found global minotaur to be as engaging to read as i find his speaking - it's not dry at all (it's a pop-economics versions of a much larger academic work). It really helped me get a layman's grasp of the subject (post-war economics and neoliberalism) - momentarily, while i was reading, but fading after as usual (spose there's a reason he's a professor)

I think of the wobblies as basically anarcho-syndicalist, or at least coming from the bakunin side of the bakunin-marx split. Whether you think chomsky is thinking of something else or not, i'll go with his worldy-wise vague identification with term (he usually says anarcho-syndicalist). Like i said, i'm not really bothered about the term - i'll usually call myself socialist, but if people are interested i'll tell them what ideas influence me, and i'll use the accurate terms then (seeing as we're already in a political discussion by then it doesn't matter).

Have you seen any of the films of Scott Noble? (metanoia-films) Lots of anarchist ideas and history in there (and loads else). The latest one, Plutocracy is really interesting about history of social movements in 19th century USA (i've read Zinn, but there's loads of gaps, as a brit); i'm looking forward to part 2 which is going to cover the early 20th century part, including the wobblies (so i can fill in some of my gaps). I'd recommend all of his films though if you haven't seen them (they're basically from an anarchist perspective (though only incidentally))

 

[BigG]

By post war economics are you refering to the long boom (steady on FUBAR) culminating in the collapse of Bretton Woods? (knew that stupid degree would come in handy one day)...

 

[Vurtual]

Yup...The global minotaur is his metaphor for the system that replaced it, and which came unstuck in 2008

To be OT, seen this leak of the TTIP negotiations? http://www.waronwant.org/media/massive-document-leak-spells-end-ttip

Seems to confirm every bad thing about the treaty and about the EU commision's role in facilitating it without our consent (eg the US will stop us selling them cars if we continue stopping the use of horrible chemicals in our food, and the EU commision will sit back and let them).

The quandry being the brexit tories want it even more than the EU globablists.

To link to Yanis's book, it seems TTIP/TPP is the in-construction replacement for the global minotaur/neoliberal/petrodollar system - ie, the global overlord has spoken: this is happening, just like 'globalisation' was, and the marshall plan before that - i guess it's a test of the current strength of the american empire as to whether they get their way this time)

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Shimmer.Fade: I agree entirely about the IMF and ECB - and also with investment banks being an abomination (at least in their current state). As for the Greece, Ireland, etc stuff, check this rather fine piece of German investigative journalism - The Secret Bank Bailout.

Gave this a watch, and thought it was very good. Interesting the different stories being peddled to the people. I still have to say it isn't as if Ireland was chosen as a target, their lack of regulation led them to simply being the path of least resistance.

Biggest take home message for me (which I already knew of) was the taking of private failure and putting onto sovereign nations and their taxpayers. The lack of transparency regarding the creditors that made poor choices but saw no consequence is part of what needs to be fixed, and the ECB needs to be put in manacles and regulated like a true non-independent central bank. I think the EU needs 100% control over the ECB, and it should have absolutely no private interests (which seem to be the majority of its interests at the moment).

ECB needs to be crushed, be strongly regulated to such an extent it can only act with the approval of indirectly elected finance ministers of EU nations, or completely nationalized by the EU.

The ECB is out of control, and no longer has the best interests of the EU project in mind, and is largely at fault for the fissures we are seeing.

Basically, don't blame the European Project. Blame the ECB, private creditors not taking damage from their mistakes, and further down the road the IMF. Without corruption none of this would happen, but as we know humans gonna human, therefore regulation almost always provides a net positive for the middle class even if it has associated costs.

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Have you seen any of the films of Scott Noble? (metanoia-films) Lots of anarchist ideas and history in there (and loads else). The latest one, Plutocracy is really interesting about history of social movements in 19th century USA (i've read Zinn, but there's loads of gaps, as a brit); i'm looking forward to part 2 which is going to cover the early 20th century part, including the wobblies (so i can fill in some of my gaps). I'd recommend all of his films though if you haven't seen them (they're basically from an anarchist perspective (though only incidentally))

I may try the Global Minotaur on audio book (limited time =( ), or order it, and read it within the next year otherwise

Thank you for the links. I've heard of Plutocracy, and should give it a go. I love how much information can be packed into some of these films. If you want a more American take on economics from a person who really knows his shit I recommend nearly anything from Robert Reich. I don't always agree with him, but he seems like a good dude with good intentions in mind, and is IMO the economist in the US most in the know attempting to represent our middle class.

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Yup...The global minotaur is his metaphor for the system that replaced it, and which came unstuck in 2008

To be OT, seen this leak of the TTIP negotiations? http://www.waronwant.org/media/massive-document-leak-spells-end-ttip

Seems to confirm every bad thing about the treaty and about the EU commision's role in facilitating it without our consent (eg the US will stop us selling them cars if we continue stopping the use of horrible chemicals in our food, and the EU commision will sit back and let them).

The quandry being the brexit tories want it even more than the EU globablists.

To link to Yanis's book, it seems TTIP/TPP is the in-construction replacement for the global minotaur/neoliberal/petrodollar system - ie, the global overlord has spoken: this is happening, just like 'globalisation' was, and the marshall plan before that - i guess it's a test of the current strength of the american empire as to whether they get their way this time)

I'm following the developments as closely as possible. Needless to say people here are getting pretty pissed about it, but there is a large propaganda wing pushing it only for the closer alliance with the US. As it stands it would be political suicide for the CDU (Merkel's party) to pass the current form. There are also so many areas where the EU and US disagree. If it can be delayed until Obama is out of office it may die out completely. My hope is that we end with a TTIP-lite which replaces needing to seek authority from industry to needing to seek authority from the people in an at least indirect form of representation, and keeps US gene technic, etc... out of the EU.

What gets people here is that many clauses having "Änderungen...nur unter Rücksprache mit der Industrie" or "Changes...only with consultation with the Industry". There are very few inclusions of the people having any say over anything in any sort of democratic fashion.


IMO this shit is going to happen eventually whether we like it or not, and we must be prepared to keep control with the middle class and away from larger interest groups.

 

[Shambles]

Basically, don't blame the European Project. Blame the ECB, private creditors not taking damage from their mistakes, and further down the road the IMF. Without corruption none of this would happen, but as we know humans gonna human, therefore regulation almost always provides a net positive for the middle class even if it has associated costs.

Thing is, it seems abundantly clear that the EU is no better than the US nor virtually any other power brokers to actually do anything about this kinda thing because they are up to their necks in it themselves. It's snouts in the trough all the way. I most certainly include large swathes of UK politicians in that too which is why I see this vote as meaningless. They really are all as bad as each other. Would you rather have shit sandwiches or pints of diarrhoea forced down your throat? Does it really make a difference?

The only meaning I see in any of this is how to get rid of the whole system - all of them - and replace with something that works for the people not the deeply corrupt plutocracy (also been meaning to watch that one - metanoia make some excellent docs as Vurtual notes).

IMO this shit is going to happen eventually whether we like it or not, and we must be prepared to keep control with the middle class and away from larger interest groups.

Leaving aside the fact that the "middle class" is a distinctly arbitrary concept of largely self-selected individuals, what on Earth gave you the impression any version of the middle classes had any say in anything

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Thing is, it seems abundantly clear that the EU is no better than the US nor virtually any other power brokers to actually do anything about this kinda thing because they are up to their necks in it themselves. It's snouts in the trough all the way. I most certainly include large swathes of UK politicians in that too which is why I see this vote as meaningless. They really are all as bad as each other. Would you rather have shit sandwiches or pints of diarrhoea forced down your throat? Does it really make a difference?

The only meaning I see in any of this is how to get rid of the whole system - all of them - and replace with something that works for the people not the deeply corrupt plutocracy (also been meaning to watch that one - metanoia make some excellent docs as Vurtual notes).

So you would prefer some other unknown and unformulated system, with who knows who at the reigns as opposed to the guaranteed rights we already receive? I can see our rights being impinged upon, but the simple fact that we can sit here and discuss these things without fear of legal persecution should mean something right? The US and EU are far from perfect, but what other system is working better in this world? The principles on which these two unions are built upon are centuries further along philosophically than anything else we have. Why not admit imperfection, and move forward trying to fix the problems we have within some pretty good systems. Even if the Irish living quality is 25% lower (somewhat hard to quantify figure, and in that documentary they juxtapose this figure with a lady buying a carrot, and only a fucking carrot, maybe she just needed a carrot?) they are still so much better off than they were under British rule.

I get your point, but you are being like the people in the US who think that because the Environmental Protection Agency makes some mistakes we should abolish it. We only have ONE EPA, when it is gone there is NO agency to protect the environment at that point.

Leaving aside the fact that the "middle class" is a distinctly arbitrary concept of largely self-selected individuals, what on Earth gave you the impression any version of the middle classes had any say in anything

Shambles this is precisely the reason Germany doesn't get fucked over in these situations. Look up the Mittelstand, and what it means to the Germans. International Neo-cons/libs are attempting to erode it with everything they have, and our finance minister, who in that documentary said nothing inappropriate, just interfered with the ECB in a move to stop the deployment of negative interest rates. He received a ton of shit from neo-con/lib publications from the US trying to say that Germans are traditionally against interfering with central banks. They forget to mention Germany has never instituted negative interest rates.

Do you have any idea what negative interest rates do? They destroy the consumer banks which the Mittelstand (middle class) rely on in order to get loans. The banks have to take on more and more risk (to the point of collapse) to meet their guaranteed payments to people who have put their money in them. A strong German Mittelstand is a strong economic force which for the most part believes in solid ethics and morals. From what I have seen around the world Germany is one of the last places where the people still have a modicum of control over their politics, and through that their day to day lives.

Other places should be emulating this as opposed to further stratifying the classes. That is where the retarded voter comes into play, who has had countless chances over the last two decades to cause real change, but people were way to Brave New Worlded.

 

[Vurtual]

....Other places should be emulating this as opposed to further stratifying the classes. That is where the retarded voter comes into play, who has had countless chances over the last two decades to cause real change, but people were way to Brave New Worlded.

I believe corbyn is trying to take ideas from the good parts of the german model, though i reckon the direction of travel most places is the same as the efforts of the neocons you describe against the mittelstand, only with even more success; the top echelons were always going to turn their attention to their shabby genteel collaborators in the end (said with affection, after all we'll all just be in the 99.9% once the neolib/cons trickle-up all the middle class' money too).

As for your conservative comments about unforumlated systems, there's obviously sense in the literal idea of conservatism (if it aint broke...), but the sense of radical change at the right time should also always be kept in mind too. We'd never get anywhere (including the current EU and US system) without occasional revolutionary shifts of one sort or another. I consider these things like self organising biological systems that can spontaneously change to more complex systems in certain circumstances (of course with a risk of the shift being to a less ordered chaotic state) - this property of self organisation in biology and nature influences my view of politics and anarchism (it's modern biology, but Kropotkin was there hundred years earlier)

An ontopic bit: So France and Italy say they'll stop TTIP? Does this take a chunk out of brexit's argument? Does anyone believe them? (though i suppose France might be starting to worry about Nuit Debout (or whatever it's called))

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

France seems dead set on stopping it for the time being. I believe they will until they get something better out of the deal

It is not a sure thing here either. Many politicians are calling for more time, and lamenting overly complicated English legal jargon which will take time to sort out.

I totally agree with you that there are times for radical change. I just think we have seen many radical changes recently, and getting back to a more stable norm would be a better spring board for a more healthy type of change.

Who knows? I know if these plutarchs attempt to go much further the time for radical change will become more and more appropriate. It is just with these things there will always be opportunists and populists looking to high-jack the momentum. This is why I feel we must be careful, especially in modern times. If we are not able to create the change we need to benefit the majority of us through political means then it is time IMO to start thinking about more drastic measures. We aren't far off from such a time, but our systems are still working to some extent. Let's see what happens with the continued outing of wealthy elites avoiding taxes, and the laws which must be changed to address this. If nothing happens we will be approaching a corner.