Do you hate total anarchism just as much as total conservatism?

Posted by: reece

Both hinder progress.

  • Yes

  • No

17% 1 votes
83% 5 votes
  • Anarchism is total freedom and equality. It is literally "without arkhos", or without leaders or rulers. The Ukrainian Free Territory and Catalonia in the Spanish Civil War are great examples of anarchist societies.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
PetersSmith says2015-07-11T14:14:10.3945563-05:00
If you go by what most people say, National Socialism is total conservatism (far-right, which I'm presuming what you mean), and that was very progressive in terms of economic reforms and technology.
reece says2015-07-11T14:30:21.0158238-05:00
Total conservatism as in the firm grasp of traditional beliefs and being averse to change or innovation.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T14:31:11.1857454-05:00
Kek, Freedom and Equality hinder progress?
reece says2015-07-11T14:38:55.6207081-05:00
@MechVarg There will always be a form of hierarchy, we're apes for goodness sake. Trying to prevent that is just as bad as trying to prevent innovation. The closes we'll come to anarchy is when we become hive minded.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T14:40:22.1032769-05:00
@reece Kek, bonobos
reece says2015-07-11T14:41:51.1642478-05:00
@MechVarg There our more gentler relatives.
reece says2015-07-11T14:42:00.7427092-05:00
Their*
MechVarg says2015-07-11T14:42:04.6005572-05:00
@reece They're* gentler*
reece says2015-07-11T14:43:37.1509390-05:00
Yet you know what i meant. Correcting a dyslexic person doesn't help much.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T14:43:50.6922140-05:00
@reece A social hierarchy implies a bottom, and no one wants to be at the bottom; henceforth, hierarchy is undesirable.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T14:45:22.5924031-05:00
@Reece I'm sorry, I can't control my inner Grammar Nazi
reece says2015-07-11T14:48:06.0927216-05:00
@MechVarg It's only undesirable if you're mistreated or you're greedy.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T14:54:59.1252988-05:00
@reece I rest mein case. Don't give me that human nature crap. Human society is naturally egalitarian, and even if it wasn't, then fight human nature.
reece says2015-07-11T14:59:44.1859261-05:00
@MechVarg law of complexity-consciousness... Yes it's human nature to become more equal. That's why i mentioned about humanity becoming a hive mind.
reece says2015-07-11T15:00:35.6662561-05:00
I'm coming from a deterministic prospective.
reece says2015-07-11T15:02:09.3952203-05:00
It's human nature either way.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:04:45.6879762-05:00
OK? And you oppose anarchism on what grounds?
reece says2015-07-11T15:09:03.3987341-05:00
@MechVarg cooperation requires authority over each other.
reece says2015-07-11T15:10:08.0533780-05:00
Some people have better traits than others of knowing whats best.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:10:17.9449683-05:00
@reece anarchism allows for direct democracy, so long as it is voluntary.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:15:51.4471879-05:00
@reece kek, then they can share their wisdom.
reece says2015-07-11T15:16:12.0706429-05:00
@MechVarg countries will get split. People that choose not to work will stick together in masses and it just goes down hill from there.
reece says2015-07-11T15:17:31.1444269-05:00
@MechVarg For you to know they would have had to use it for their advantage.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:20:02.3738281-05:00
@reece What? "He who shall not work, nor shall he eat". What? Who use what advantage? Plz make sense.
reece says2015-07-11T15:25:23.5008182-05:00
@MechVarg They will find away to survive. For you to know their wisdom, they would of had to use it. You know currency goes out the window too in total anarchism
reece says2015-07-11T15:29:10.8086357-05:00
Economics i mean but that too.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:30:02.4487353-05:00
@reece Wtf? Stop blathering and explain why you're against anarchism in a coherent manner.
reece says2015-07-11T15:33:46.9714087-05:00
@MechVarg Okay, so if the US adopted anarchism it would collapse and so would the countries it's supporting. Millions would die.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:34:34.2660607-05:00
@reece Ok, good, now walk me through that scenario, please.
reece says2015-07-11T15:39:30.8910157-05:00
@MechVarg Firstly currency goes out the window. In total anarchism cooperation has to be on a voluntary basis without recourse to force or compulsion. Resources which include currency.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:40:25.9721585-05:00
@reece True, people would trade without money.
reece says2015-07-11T15:49:36.1899106-05:00
@MechVarg Thus countries the US supports would collapse or be in ruin, etc. Also the US Wouldn't be able to trade with any other country properly. Secondly there would be know laws in place to settle disputes and thus there would be a large death toll. America would stop progressing and it would most likely get invaded.
reece says2015-07-11T15:51:55.3220164-05:00
No*
MechVarg says2015-07-11T15:52:30.0627710-05:00
@no* There's no reason why said countries couldn't become self-sufficient. Order would be kept in place by communities. There'd really be no reason for crime since people would get the full product of their labor or have their needs met by the community. The people can take up arms against invaders. Stop progressing? There is no reason it would stop progressing.
reece says2015-07-11T15:58:57.1689331-05:00
@MechVarg You do realize no currency means no currency. There will be no reword for working. You know how much oil your country would loss. Millions of your people would die if it became self-sufficient. America holds about 350 million people.
reece says2015-07-11T16:00:34.4898278-05:00
Disease would sweep across the country.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:00:54.2652438-05:00
@reece there is no reason why they can't be self-sufficient. Your reward is the product of your labor or the satisfaction of your needs.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:01:33.2493939-05:00
@Why would disease sweep across the country? We have people trained in medicine.
reece says2015-07-11T16:06:10.1791149-05:00
@MechVarg Haha meany jobs don't give you that satisfaction but are still crucial for a countries development. Disease would sweep across the country because of all the corpses.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:10:54.5081888-05:00
@reece I rest my case
reece says2015-07-11T16:14:23.1270066-05:00
@MechVarg on what?
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:15:51.3727309-05:00
@reece you've run out of coherent rebuttals. I rest my case.
reece says2015-07-11T16:19:00.4333090-05:00
@MechVarg *facepalm* There wouldn't be meany people working and if "people trained in medicine" were working, they wouldn't be able to stop the spread of diseases on that scale.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:21:48.5536190-05:00
@reece They would have to wörk or starve. There is no reason why there would be widespread disease. So now we'll all become ill if we depose our oppressors?
reece says2015-07-11T16:26:29.8822156-05:00
@MechVarg They wouldn't be working to eat. I've already said it would be because of all the corpses. We will become ill if we depose of structure altogether.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:28:55.0594155-05:00
@reece WHY, DAMMIT? Why else would they be working? To stay alive and have a good life, of course. WHY would disease sweep the nation. Didn't happen ANYWHERE where anarchy was established. Not in Ukraine, not Spain, not Paris.
reece says2015-07-11T16:35:13.3024911-05:00
@MechVarg Again, there would be currency to compels people to work. We're talking about total anarchism.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:37:18.6532624-05:00
@reece Is not the promise of a good life reason to work? Just look at Twin Oaks. Sorry about my outburst, I can get overzealous.
reece says2015-07-11T16:39:58.9678514-05:00
@MechVarg What's the promise based on?
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:44:31.9066644-05:00
@reece If you work, you'll get the full product of your labor or the community will meet your needs.
reece says2015-07-11T16:48:50.1318091-05:00
@MechVarg So the promise is the guarantee of your communities respect? They must be very small communities.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:51:01.8967628-05:00
@reece Yes, they must.
reece says2015-07-11T16:53:43.5927022-05:00
@MechVarg They must be very small communities?
MechVarg says2015-07-11T16:55:16.3697332-05:00
@reece Yes, town/village level. Any form of socialism isn't very effective if you group too many people together.
reece says2015-07-11T16:55:28.7716537-05:00
That would just make the invasion much easier.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T17:00:38.4608685-05:00
@reece All the communes would work together against invaders. It's not like they would be competing nations.
reece says2015-07-11T17:11:44.3662938-05:00
@MechVarg But there would have to be commanders, right?
MechVarg says2015-07-11T17:15:15.1066938-05:00
@reece Commanders whose orders were voluntarily followed ;)
reece says2015-07-11T17:17:00.6713878-05:00
@MechVarg Do you think That would hold up in the middle of battle?
reece says2015-07-11T17:18:49.8559101-05:00
There would be no consequences for them to abandon their post.
MechVarg says2015-07-11T17:19:20.0577037-05:00
@reece In the event of an invasion, the people would just arm themselves and fite the invaders (intentional misspelling)
reece says2015-07-11T17:25:33.6010221-05:00
LOL whatever you say.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.