Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Now an anarchist, I am (the DDO one)

DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:00:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
NOTE: I know that I posted this in Politics, but I don't know which one it's more appropriate for. Anyway:

Yes, 'tis true. I am now officially part of that oddball group known as the Anarchists. I haven't decided what type I'd like to subscribe to, or if I'd prefer anarchy without adjectives. However, I think I'll let the anarchists fight over what sect I'll join. *basks*
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:03:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:06:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:03:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why?

I've been drifting that way for a while. Today I just decided to take the plunge. Also, spinko's been doing work on me for the past two weeks. That helped me finally take the anarchist plunge.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:11:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:06:28 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:03:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why?

I've been drifting that way for a while. Today I just decided to take the plunge. Also, spinko's been doing work on me for the past two weeks. That helped me finally take the anarchist plunge.

lol that's pure indoctrination.

Do you believe that anarchy is sustainable? Human beings are very tribalistic and have a tendency to establish a leader and followers. In some cases this would be beneficial for them. What would stop this from happening?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:13:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:11:22 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:06:28 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:03:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why?

I've been drifting that way for a while. Today I just decided to take the plunge. Also, spinko's been doing work on me for the past two weeks. That helped me finally take the anarchist plunge.

lol that's pure indoctrination.

Do you believe that anarchy is sustainable? Human beings are very tribalistic and have a tendency to establish a leader and followers. In some cases this would be beneficial for them. What would stop this from happening?

How so? I was drifting that way of my own accord, anyway--ever since I joined DDO.

Anyway--anarchism in the sense of a lack of an actual state--not the lack of VOLUNTARY groups.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
UnStupendousMan
Posts: 3,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:20:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
While anarchy may be great for the idea of an actually good democracy, i.e. a system where people actually care about issues and discuss them, it certainly not great for quality of life. It would be very hard to get things like electricity, if I understand anarchy correctly. One would have to focus on things like food rather than video games. (And the science couldn't be done, so you couldn't make a neat gun for the people who are still alive.)

Anyway, BOOO.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:22:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:20:46 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
While anarchy may be great for the idea of an actually good democracy, i.e. a system where people actually care about issues and discuss them, it certainly not great for quality of life. It would be very hard to get things like electricity, if I understand anarchy correctly. One would have to focus on things like food rather than video games. (And the science couldn't be done, so you couldn't make a neat gun for the people who are still alive.)

Anyway, BOOO.

I take it the market can't do any of those things?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:30:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:11:22 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:06:28 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:03:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why?

I've been drifting that way for a while. Today I just decided to take the plunge. Also, spinko's been doing work on me for the past two weeks. That helped me finally take the anarchist plunge.

lol that's pure indoctrination.

Do you believe that anarchy is sustainable? Human beings are very tribalistic and have a tendency to establish a leader and followers. In some cases this would be beneficial for them. What would stop this from happening?

exactly and the anacharcy will always get runned over.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
UnStupendousMan
Posts: 3,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:31:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:22:51 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:20:46 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
While anarchy may be great for the idea of an actually good democracy, i.e. a system where people actually care about issues and discuss them, it certainly not great for quality of life. It would be very hard to get things like electricity, if I understand anarchy correctly. One would have to focus on things like food rather than video games. (And the science couldn't be done, so you couldn't make a neat gun for the people who are still alive.)

Anyway, BOOO.

I take it the market can't do any of those things?

I take it that you are now Anarcho-Capitalist.

The market requires certain services--such as police--be there in order to survive. Or else it's going to dissolve into post-apocalypse without the apocalypse.

In any case, a true anarchist state (I don't care if it's contradictory, it's an anarchist state!) is going to be really, really hard to create. And mini-governments are going to pop up anyway.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:33:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:31:47 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:22:51 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:20:46 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
While anarchy may be great for the idea of an actually good democracy, i.e. a system where people actually care about issues and discuss them, it certainly not great for quality of life. It would be very hard to get things like electricity, if I understand anarchy correctly. One would have to focus on things like food rather than video games. (And the science couldn't be done, so you couldn't make a neat gun for the people who are still alive.)

Anyway, BOOO.

I take it the market can't do any of those things?

I take it that you are now Anarcho-Capitalist.

The market requires certain services--such as police--be there in order to survive. Or else it's going to dissolve into post-apocalypse without the apocalypse.

Ever heard of private security contractors?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
UnStupendousMan
Posts: 3,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:38:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:33:26 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:31:47 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:22:51 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 4/11/2012 9:20:46 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
While anarchy may be great for the idea of an actually good democracy, i.e. a system where people actually care about issues and discuss them, it certainly not great for quality of life. It would be very hard to get things like electricity, if I understand anarchy correctly. One would have to focus on things like food rather than video games. (And the science couldn't be done, so you couldn't make a neat gun for the people who are still alive.)

Anyway, BOOO.

I take it the market can't do any of those things?

I take it that you are now Anarcho-Capitalist.

The market requires certain services--such as police--be there in order to survive. Or else it's going to dissolve into post-apocalypse without the apocalypse.

Ever heard of private security contractors?

Yes. However, a society without government is eventually going to fall apart anyway. People like to have control over people--whether it be cooperations or tribes. And: what would happen if an economic depression were to suddenly hit this anarchist state?
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2012 9:48:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Government is good, but in small doses.

I don't mind government interfering with the free market a little......but a lot.....thats when it gets bad.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:10:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:20:46 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
While anarchy may be great for the idea of an actually good democracy, i.e. a system where people actually care about issues and discuss them, it certainly not great for quality of life. It would be very hard to get things like electricity, if I understand anarchy correctly. One would have to focus on things like food rather than video games. (And the science couldn't be done, so you couldn't make a neat gun for the people who are still alive.)

lol portal reference
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:05:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 12:55:03 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Go with Anarcho-Piratism!

http://www.debate.org...

https://www.facebook.com...

I kind of like anarcho-surrealism and anarcho-unicornism myself.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:52:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?

That's a strawman...The conclusion from America desiring conservatism is not to stop being Liberal but to concede to its desire. Isn't it hypocritical for an anarchist of all people to deny individuals their desire for government?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:53:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:52:15 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?

That's a strawman...The conclusion from America desiring conservatism is not to stop being Liberal but to concede to its desire. Isn't it hypocritical for an anarchist of all people to deny individuals their desire for government?

non-aggressive desire for government*
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:55:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:53:07 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:52:15 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?

That's a strawman...The conclusion from America desiring conservatism is not to stop being Liberal but to concede to its desire. Isn't it hypocritical for an anarchist of all people to deny individuals their desire for government?

non-aggressive desire for government*

That's a contradiction in terms. All governments as they currently exist are aggressive. I would have no problem with them forming a "government" which did not force people to be a part of it. That's just a voluntary group.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:58:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also it wasn't a strawman. You were using it as an argument against people being anarchists. Obviously I believe that people's minds can be changed, as do you which is why in this situation and the hypothetical I posed we both keep our ideologies.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 11:12:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:55:41 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:53:07 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:52:15 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?

That's a strawman...The conclusion from America desiring conservatism is not to stop being Liberal but to concede to its desire. Isn't it hypocritical for an anarchist of all people to deny individuals their desire for government?

non-aggressive desire for government*

That's a contradiction in terms. All governments as they currently exist are aggressive. I would have no problem with them forming a "government" which did not force people to be a part of it. That's just a voluntary group.

Nobody is forcing to live in the United Kingdom.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 11:49:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 11:12:37 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:55:41 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:53:07 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:52:15 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?

That's a strawman...The conclusion from America desiring conservatism is not to stop being Liberal but to concede to its desire. Isn't it hypocritical for an anarchist of all people to deny individuals their desire for government?

non-aggressive desire for government*

That's a contradiction in terms. All governments as they currently exist are aggressive. I would have no problem with them forming a "government" which did not force people to be a part of it. That's just a voluntary group.

Nobody is forcing to live in the United Kingdom.

I'm going to assume this is comic, rather than you actually believe this is a rational argument.
(If not, let me counter with a question; say there is a powerful criminal syndicate in a city demanding a certain cut of all businesses profits or they will respond with violence, would you also tell the business owners that no-one is forcing them to stay?)
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 12:08:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/11/2012 9:00:09 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
NOTE: I know that I posted this in Politics, but I don't know which one it's more appropriate for. Anyway:

Yes, 'tis true. I am now officially part of that oddball group known as the Anarchists. I haven't decided what type I'd like to subscribe to, or if I'd prefer anarchy without adjectives. However, I think I'll let the anarchists fight over what sect I'll join. *basks*

My school's principal is a borderline anarchist
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 12:39:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 11:49:31 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 11:12:37 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:55:41 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:53:07 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:52:15 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:45:28 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:42:27 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:30:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Love the bizarre assertions in this thread. THINGS WILL FALL APART COS I SAY SO!
There is nothing special about governments as groups which help society function - merely that they are the most prone to use violence than any other type of group.

The point isn't that things will fall apart, the point is that man wants government.

How is that even relevant? If an ultra-conservative became president, would it make sense for you to say, well America wants a conservative, there's no point being a liberal?

That's a strawman...The conclusion from America desiring conservatism is not to stop being Liberal but to concede to its desire. Isn't it hypocritical for an anarchist of all people to deny individuals their desire for government?

non-aggressive desire for government*

That's a contradiction in terms. All governments as they currently exist are aggressive. I would have no problem with them forming a "government" which did not force people to be a part of it. That's just a voluntary group.

Nobody is forcing to live in the United Kingdom.

I'm going to assume this is comic, rather than you actually believe this is a rational argument.
(If not, let me counter with a question; say there is a powerful criminal syndicate in a city demanding a certain cut of all businesses profits or they will respond with violence, would you also tell the business owners that no-one is forcing them to stay?)

I don't contest that governments act immorally.

But how do you differentiate between "aggressive"societies vs. "volunteer" societies?

A "volunteer" society can of course have powerful people demand they receive profits. If not they can face violence or leave.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:30:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 12:39:20 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/12/2012 11:49:31 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Nobody is forcing to live in the United Kingdom.

I'm going to assume this is comic, rather than you actually believe this is a rational argument.
(If not, let me counter with a question; say there is a powerful criminal syndicate in a city demanding a certain cut of all businesses profits or they will respond with violence, would you also tell the business owners that no-one is forcing them to stay?)

I don't contest that governments act immorally.

But how do you differentiate between "aggressive"societies vs. "volunteer" societies?

A "volunteer" society can of course have powerful people demand they receive profits. If not they can face violence or leave.

Then it is no longer voluntaryism...
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:57:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't have a problem with people following laws of their own ideologies in any state, but a central government should exist nonetheless. People with same ideologies who have their own lands will eventually unite to form a state. It will result in what we have today. That's why I don't support anarchy; it's like plucking a delicious fruit that will rot. A central government that protects rights and lets people follow their own ideologies is the most rational thing to support here.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 3:14:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:30:49 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 4/12/2012 12:39:20 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/12/2012 11:49:31 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Nobody is forcing to live in the United Kingdom.

I'm going to assume this is comic, rather than you actually believe this is a rational argument.
(If not, let me counter with a question; say there is a powerful criminal syndicate in a city demanding a certain cut of all businesses profits or they will respond with violence, would you also tell the business owners that no-one is forcing them to stay?)

I don't contest that governments act immorally.

But how do you differentiate between "aggressive"societies vs. "volunteer" societies?

A "volunteer" society can of course have powerful people demand they receive profits. If not they can face violence or leave.

Then it is no longer voluntaryism...

Then what is voluntaryism? If I live in an apartment and don't pay, my landlord can kick me out.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...