Bluelight

Thread: Anarchy is love!

Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. Collapse Details
    Anarchy is love! 
    #1
    I am making this post to open some people up to the idea of anarchy.

    A lot of people may see it as a childish concept that has no basis in reality, but if you think about it more deeply, you will find that anarchy = love.

    The problem with government is that it exists because of people's lack of insight into who they truly are. You give your power away to an external entity that promises security. It is never a good idea to give your power away to an external entity. Just like religion, this leads to complacency and a hive mind mentality and takes away from critical thinking.

    If everyone was able to understand this and act as an individual instead of a slave to the status-quo, we would have utopia.

    Anarchy is love because it takes the focus away from an external power and puts that power in your hands. With that, if you are evil, you will obviously do bad things, however I think that most people have within them (somewhere deep down), the ability to know exactly what is right and wrong and what they should do with their lives to help others. The laziness is easier though, so most people choose to give that power away. If you fully embrace yourself and all your insecurities, you will find that there is a path for you to ultimate clarity. You could become an almost god-like being, but the ego keeps people away from this.

    The reason why it equals love is because if everyone was able to fully embrace themselves, this creates a ripple effect and allows others to more easily reach the same place within themselves.

    Government is the biggest cause of death in the world (war). If people could be enlightened and always act based on that true deep knowing within themselves, they would see this. Everyone could act as a community without violence or coercion.

    Yes, this is not simple or easy, but I think it is the next step in human evolution. If people don't do this, the coming singularity could be a very nasty place with a lot of government control.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    I find it most interesting that you call it the next step in human evolution. Because that's really very much what I see as the fatal flaw of ideologies like anarchy. That human beings just aren't compatible with them as we currently exist.

    It would take us evolving into something new for it to work. The reason I don't think anarchy works, and I have the same thoughts about communism. Is in order to function it requires a level of mutual agreement humans just don't have as a large group.

    That disagreement means that corruption, inability and failure are all that wait any system that is built on the belief that all it needs is for everyone to agree.

    Our current democratic mixed capitalist system is far from perfect, but it is at least capable of prolonged functioning with such widespread disagreement while still maintaining fairly high quality of life.

    I look at the history of many different human cultures. Largely anarchist social systems can work on a small scale, because it's largely one group with a high level of mutual agreement. But with societies as large as we have them today, we have many groups all operating under one system. The same division that destroys other systems entirely can still be seen in ours. And it still causes a lot of problems. But ours is the only system for which I see evidence that it can withstand that division while providing fairly high quality of life.

    I think people who grew up within it frequently fail to see the good, the success, and see only the idealized versions of the alternatives.

    It's the worst possible system... Except for all the others.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    @Synaps3: good luck. btw your going to see true anarchy in your life time. not the kind i would prefer but anarchy comes in a few different flavors... it's already started.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    There'll always be some sort of ruling system as long as humans are still around. Been that way even since ancient tribes.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    Moderator
    Current Events and Politics
    Homeless & Anonymous
    Sober Living
    North & South America Drug Discussion
    tathra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    The Abyss
    Posts
    21,346
    anarchism and libertarianism are basically the same thing.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    Um No. No they're really not. Libertarianism is smallest government possible. Anarchy is no government.

    Libertarians are generally OK with various government systems anarchists are not. Not in the formal sense anyway.

    Both philosophies have various subcategories. Including some which have a degree of overlap. But they are far from interchangeable and have different ideas of what the governments roll is if any at all.

    Anarchists generally think the smallest government possible is no government. Libertarians are usually fine with having a government, they just want it much smaller than most philosophies. With anarchism bring an obvious exception.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Government is slavery.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    I agree with Jess. In short anarchists want no government, libertarians want less government. Of course there's about 100 subcategories.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    I think perhaps a reasonably uncontroversial example would be the legal system. Anarchists tend towards the line of thought that societies can self govern without a formal legal system that's considered a true establishment.

    Libertarians on the other hand generally agree with having a legal system. One that's operated by a fairly conventional government and upholds a series of rights. Generally the type of rights that the government must not infringe and prevent others infringing (like the right to not be murdered by your neighbor). As opposed to rights that must be provided by the government. Like public education. The general exception to that being the right to vote, which is a positive right that's generally agreed upon even by those who don't recognize most positive rights.

    Anarchists and libertarians have similarities, and there is some overlap. But they're still quite distinct in what they believe in.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #10
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    I think perhaps a reasonably uncontroversial example would be the legal system. Anarchists tend towards the line of thought that societies can self govern without a formal legal system that's considered a true establishment.
    Even self governing is a form of ruling system.
    Reply With Quote
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    I agree. I am not actually arguing in anarchisms favor as a concept. I think that a lot of anarchists fail to see how small the difference is between what they propose and the various styles of governments they want to get away from. For much the kind of reason you describe. That all governments are all social abstractions that exist because we believe in them. The difference between the ones we're talking about and the kind many anarchists seem to value seems fairly nonexistent to me. They may operate in different ways. But they are all governments. It's all still a system that exists because people believe in and follow it. Who's purpose is to moderate societies behavior.

    But my last few posts have been an attempt to explain the difference in the concepts from the perspective of the people who follow them.

    And as best I understand it, while I might not agree, anarchists see a more decentralized system of mutual agreement the kind I've heard anarchists describe as somehow different and more desirable to more formal systematic government systems. The point is, libertarians don't. They aren't usually interested in such distinctions. They're more about keeping the overall type of government we have, but making it much smaller in scope. Confining it to the bare essentials. What exactly is essential depends on what form of libertarianism you follow. But it all tends to still be enforced by a government structure in line with what we think of today.
    Last edited by JessFR; 29-04-2018 at 15:26.
    Reply With Quote
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Yeah I pretty much agree. To me true anarchism would be every man for themselves meaning that you'd have to fend for yourself and not depend on anybody else for anything. But as a society that's obviously not really beneficial.
    Reply With Quote
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Quote Originally Posted by nuttynutskin View Post
    Yeah I pretty much agree. To me true anarchism would be every man for themselves meaning that you'd have to fend for yourself and not depend on anybody else for anything. But as a society that's obviously not really beneficial.
    How is that not beneficial for society? The more people focus on themselves instead of external control, the better the society. This may seem counter-intuitive, but we know that humans are by default selfish beings. If you choose to embrace this, it actually creates more harmony than trying to force people into the collectivist mindset. That mindset is not natural. Everyone always puts themselves first. Yes, there maybe some people who don't, but in general, this is going against human nature.

    The idea is that if you find that god-like source within yourself, you will find that being selfish actually becomes being selfless. The more you help others, the more satisfaction you get. It is an upward spiral.
    Reply With Quote
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    I dispute your entire premise. Humans are not selfish naturally they are collectivist naturally. I say this even though I strongly align politically with individualist beliefs.

    Humans are social animals and evolved for cooperation. It's no accident society works the way it does now. It's not chance.

    Yes, it's complicated and individuals do exhibit selfishness in various circumstances. But overall the species is a social animal that tends towards cooperation.
    Reply With Quote
     

  15. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Synaps3 View Post
    How is that not beneficial for society? The more people focus on themselves instead of external control, the better the society. This may seem counter-intuitive, but we know that humans are by default selfish beings. If you choose to embrace this, it actually creates more harmony than trying to force people into the collectivist mindset. That mindset is not natural. Everyone always puts themselves first. Yes, there maybe some people who don't, but in general, this is going against human nature.

    The idea is that if you find that god-like source within yourself, you will find that being selfish actually becomes being selfless. The more you help others, the more satisfaction you get. It is an upward spiral.
    I also disagree that humans are inherently selfish. Hell, even cavemen operated as a sort of collective. I think humanity may be becoming more selfish but I think that's a different debate. Either way, IMO it benefits society as a whole to have different people that are good at different things. Not everyone is equipped to be a surgeon, not everyone is equipped to be a firefighter, etc., etc. If people were left to fend for themselves in this day in age not very many people would survive because like it or not we're all dependent in one way or another on others. Do you think you could survive without any outside help? I'll admit people could probably stand to be more self reliant including myself, but I don't see true anarchy ever happening, and if it does it's not going to be pretty. Other than that your last two sentences are a bit ironic because you're talking about helping others which is what a society is supposed to do.
    Reply With Quote
     

  16. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    I dispute your entire premise. Humans are not selfish naturally they are collectivist naturally. I say this even though I strongly align politically with individualist beliefs.

    Humans are social animals and evolved for cooperation. It's no accident society works the way it does now. It's not chance.

    Yes, it's complicated and individuals do exhibit selfishness in various circumstances. But overall the species is a social animal that tends towards cooperation.
    Humans are social animals and we have evolved for cooperation, but not with this many people.. especially in the cities.

    Ever since the dawn of man we've been at war with each other. The Protestants vs the Catholics, USA vs Everyone ( ) , the rich vs the poor.

    Most of us are probably empathetic enough to live in relative harmony for a while, until someone ruins it. It just takes one.. but there'll be many.

    Anarchism wouldn't work. Not now. Not with this many people on Earth.
    Reply With Quote
     

  17. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Quote Originally Posted by rickolasnice View Post
    Humans are social animals and we have evolved for cooperation, but not with this many people.. especially in the cities.

    Ever since the dawn of man we've been at war with each other. The Protestants vs the Catholics, USA vs Everyone ( ) , the rich vs the poor.

    Most of us are probably empathetic enough to live in relative harmony for a while, until someone ruins it. It just takes one.. but there'll be many.

    Anarchism wouldn't work. Not now. Not with this many people on Earth.
    Yeah in general I'd agree with that.
    Reply With Quote
     

  18. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Moderator
    Current Events and Politics
    Escher's Waterfall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    In the desert, worshipping thirst
    Posts
    8,932
    Quote Originally Posted by rickolasnice View Post
    Humans are social animals and we have evolved for cooperation, but not with this many people.. especially in the cities.
    Probably not in the country either. Humans have social groups, and we demonize the "other" - those not in our social group.
    Reply With Quote
     

  19. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    Bluelighter effingcustie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    or a gun
    Posts
    1,204
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    I think that a lot of anarchists fail to see how small the difference is between what they propose and the various styles of governments they want to get away from. For much the kind of reason you describe. That all governments are all social abstractions that exist because we believe in them. The difference between the ones we're talking about and the kind many anarchists seem to value seems fairly nonexistent to me. They may operate in different ways. But they are all governments. It's all still a system that exists because people believe in and follow it. Who's purpose is to moderate societies behavior.
    In my mind the key difference is the principle of self-determination as a core of anarchism. In a lot of ways the ideal society I imagine myself living in under whatever anarchism would look like is not that different than the society I'm living in today, especially when looking at more local government, economy etc. In a lot of other ways though, the society I live in today feels like a completely absurd and backwards system I wish to have no part in, but don't really have much of a choice on a lot of levels, especially thinking about bigger government and more overarching power structures (things like my tax dollars going to war, corporate welfare, environmental destruction, mass incarceration, etc). Anarchism in my mind is less a specific vision for a system of government, or lack thereof, than the idea of decentralized power structures that leave the possibility for radical self-determination for all people. It requires holding space for the immense complexity and diversity that balancing self determination with personal responsibility in a world of 7 billion+ unique humans would take.
    Reply With Quote
     

  20. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Humans are too stupid for any of that to work.
    Reply With Quote
     

  21. Collapse Details
     
    #21
    Bluelighter effingcustie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    or a gun
    Posts
    1,204
    ?\_(ツ)_/?
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •