I believe that for any anarchist society to survive it would have to tackle these questions:

What would keep a Fascist movement from sweeping an Anarchist society?
What would keep it from just "reseting the clock" on government and start us out with tribal Chiefs, Kings, and Queens again?

In short, how will you preserve anarchy when it is so vulnerable?

If you can conquer these questions while still adhering to the basic anarchist principle of only voluntary associations with people(i.e. no real government) and no breaches on human rights then you might have yourself another anarchist on your hands. I personally think of Anarchy as a noble pursuit, but it's Utopian, it isn't realistic in my eyes.

Quote:What would keep a Fascist movement from sweeping an Anarchist society?

For the anarchist society to exist it would have had to overthrow an authoritarian type state. This said fascist movement could never overtake an anarchist society simple because the anrachist society is full of anarchist, just like a fish could not survive out of water.

Quote:What would keep it from just "reseting the clock" on government and start us out with tribal Chiefs, Kings, and Queens again?

Thats actually a question i ask myself allot. I think in an anarchist society the people would be in charge and in control of there own lives. Each man would be his own king. But human nature being what it is i think that like you said it is a bit Utopian.

Quote:In short, how will you preserve anarchy when it is so vulnerable?

You would hope that anarchy would preserve itself. At the end of the day who can rule a society of free thinkers? Who would want to?


I agree with you that anarchy is a bit Utopian. I don't particularly like to aly myself to any group and thus im hesitant to call myself a fully fledged anarchist. But i think anarchy has the best interest of humanity at heart. I see Anarchy as a means to an end. Anarchy isn't the answer its the way to the answer.

The more I learn about anarchy the more I begin to like it but for some people it will be a nightmare because they have no government to help them. But wes is right it will be hard to achieve and it may not achieveable at all.

in order for anarchy to work, there has to be enough people willing to fight against rising authority figures. these new regimes' power will be astronomically small compared to today, but it would still require vigilance on the part of the people. not every single person has to be an anarchist, there just has to be enough to stand against potential dictators. anarchy isn't impossible, it just needs some recruiting before the actual conflict can begin.

If anarchy is so free and voluntary what's to keep people from creating armies and conquering land. What's to stop them from gaining power.

It's been said the only the truly educated of us can entertain a thought without actually accepting it. I think this is true. If people hear propaganda they will believe if they let it simmer in their mind for awhile. Especially if it is effective propaganda. Hitler drew cheering crowds with his charisma and his Nazi views that Jews are subhuman and cause society's problems. If someone was to parallel him people might be drawn to that person. They might accept his views. I know if I was a crazed maniacal mastermind I would love the vulnerability inherent in anarchy and would be able to use it my advantage.

I just don't think you realize things aren't black and white. The world is many times shades of gray. I think the best world would be one where there was only government so far as to enforce the Libertarian Axiom of Non-Aggression:
"that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else."
The only thing the State is good for is this, it is a tool to be used to enforce this and nothing more.

Of course this is far from a perfect world, my perfect world I would not even fit in. Nobody living today can. I don't want a perfect world because it is unachievable. I think Anarchy is noble, it is very noble, it is many people's idea of a perfect world, but it can't happen. Just like perfection.

Anarchy in itself isn't flawed, people are.

Weswammy Wrote:Anarchy in itself isn't flawed, people are.

Then why do we put them in charge of the rest of us?

zomgs, true brilliance.

We can just limit their power so they can run the country without running our liberty into oblivion.

Weswammy Wrote:We can just limit their power so they can run the country without running our liberty into oblivion.

And how do we do that? Couldn't they make up excuses to limit our freedom and condition us to accept more stupid laws?

A well written Constitution would that plainly stated: The government of Generic States of Genericland cannot expand it's powers beyond what is stated in this Constitution would suffice.

Sadly the USA's Constitution doesn't do that.

It does have rules, but the gov. keeps breaking them.

Besides, isn't checks and balances supposed to keep them in line or something?

The Constitution isn't plain enough. The government just takes to the belief that: As long as it doesn't say we can't do it we can do it. That's because the Constitution never stated that: No powers except those outlined in this Constitution shall be goven to government.

And if a government with a Constitution like I would like was to break the Constitution the people would get in an uproar and the Supreme Court would surely knock the violating laws down.

The three main problems with anarchism seem to be the following: control of the money supply, military defense, and a well done justice system, three things which have proved essential to society but at the same time are hirearchies (not really compatible with a non-hirearchy government). The solution? Honestly, I don't know, which is why I, although enjoy the idea of anarcho-capitalism, stick to miniarchism for now.

Weswammy Wrote:And if a government with a Constitution like I would like was to break the Constitution the people would get in an uproar and the Supreme Court would surely knock the violating laws down.

And you're sure of that? There's some things going on now, but there isn't much of an uproar about it.

That's because I haven't gotten my license to legally own a whole lot of thing...

The Person I Thought Was a Libertarian Wrote:control of the money supply

Are you dang crazy!?!
Control of the life blood of the economy is stupid! It's against freedom, I don't like things against freedom. Bank issued money would be much better. Especially in this day and age banks will probably have competing currencies, imagine a domestic currency market!

Weswammy Wrote:That's because I haven't gotten my license to legally own a whole lot of thing...

Um....what?

Quote:I think the best world would be one where there was only government so far as to enforce the Libertarian Axiom of Non-Aggression:
"that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else."
The only thing the State is good for is this, it is a tool to be used to enforce this and nothing more.

I'd go for that.
I think it'd be slightly easier to get people to support that, than it would be to get them to support anarchy. Only slightly though, most people are still so damn dependant on all the weird laws we have, they wouldn't be able to imagine life without them. Change will have to be gradual...

Why not just stay that way? Would a government that was reduced to that sort of "Night Watchman" status not be "perfect"?
Anarchism opens the door for too many things, but I would rather have anarchism than what we have today. If and only if it came down to a conflict between the current system and an anarchist one, I would totally help your cause.

As a wise man once said:

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson

KittyKatBlack Wrote:Um....what?

If I could legally get a hold of some things, there would definitely be an uproar....

...uhh, you didn't hear that...

I think everyone is confused on what anarchy really is. You have absolute ownership over your own life, not everyone else's. You can smoke weed, never shower, and piss all over your own property. But only your property.

Everything can be provided better by the market than the state.

Justice
Defense
Minarchism

TOLFA was my first course in market anarchism. If anyone needs a mentor (system to help out TOLFA students), I'll oblige.

As I discovered at my job today when I was soul seeking. I'am all for anarchy but I got to be careful about it because I don't want to get arrested for plans to commit terrorism. I was talking to my dad one time and he told me about how there has to be little people who get paid low and all that shit just so the big people exist and my dad works his ass off on 2 jobs. I told him why can't everybody be important and there not be any little people but thats not how this country works...

I know change takes time but lets just say I'am not a waiting kind of guy and right now (I know I keep repeating this) It seems like change is hopeless but than again it looked the same for martin luther.
Umm if anybody can tell if I'am what kinda anarcist am I if i'am one and not just a idealist.

I distrust the government.
I like the idea of everybody being equal and there not being any little man.
I believe we can help those who need it but those who can help themselves and choose not to don't deserve it.
(Welfare I'am looking at you!)
I like the idea of being my own person and owning my life not my country owning it.
I have faith that its possible for humanity to run a society without a government behind it.
It may be rough (Some gangs running around shooting people(We already have that) people will fight over beliefs (we already have that) .
Even in court now real justice doesn't exist at all. In court justice is handed out based on highly paid lawyers, Sob stories, playing with people's emotions, And making people who may have done no wrong look like heartless monsters and it even lets those who are guilty of crimes go free (O.J Simpson).

(Have mercy I'am trying at this my unitelligent self. I want to know more and I guess I will look at you links)

Quote:Why not just stay that way? Would a government that was reduced to that sort of "Night Watchman" status not be "perfect"?

Staying that way would be fine with me. It'd be pretty much the same thing as anarchy in practice, just with a different name. People keep saying anarchy will have a similar kind of organization to look after people's rights, in this case it's just called "government" and has no actual power beyond protecting people. Sounds good to me.

Government can never stay within its bounds. The point of the Constitution was to keep government in check. Even though the Constitution was still a pretty large leash for government, it was destroyed. Jackson knocked on the walls, Lincoln weakened the walls, FDR outright destroyed the walls, and now Bush is getting the rubble out of the way.

Well, well. That's because the people weren't diligent enough to elect the right guy. We just need to rebuild the walls, that's all it takes.

But it takes hard work and time.

SoulRiser Wrote:Staying that way would be fine with me. It'd be pretty much the same thing as anarchy in practice, just with a different name. People keep saying anarchy will have a similar kind of organization to look after people's rights, in this case it's just called "government" and has no actual power beyond protecting people. Sounds good to me.

No, it's called minarchism.

Heart of shadows Wrote:As I discovered at my job today when I was soul seeking. I'am all for anarchy but I got to be careful about it because I don't want to get arrested for plans to commit terrorism. I was talking to my dad one time and he told me about how there has to be little people who get paid low and all that shit just so the big people exist and my dad works his ass off on 2 jobs. I told him why can't everybody be important and there not be any little people but thats not how this country works...

When I read that I detected something: Envy.

Not to mention the fact that you ignore a lot of things, like the trickle down effect in health care that actually leads to better health care for all people, and the incentive to actually work! The fact is that not everyone thrives in a setting where everyone gets the same amount of money. Some, no wait, most people would be lazy bums because there is no higher standard to work for. And the idea that everything is collectively owned is absurd! It would never work on a large scale because only a small amount of people would thrive in it.

No to mention the fact that some jobs are more important than others. Why do you think a doctor gets payed more than the guy that works at Wal-Mart? I know! Doctor Bob over there saves people's lives while Joe Casheir over there sells Yu-Gi-Oh cards and poptarts.

And the fact is I don't really care what economic ideology you take part in the only way to truly create a good capitalist and communist society is for the government to let go of the economy altogether. If a Libertarian was actually elected and he disassociated gov't from economy then there would be communist communes rise in numbers and capitalism would actually be a whole lot more fair. As I said before, if capitalism was without government control everyone would nearly always have equal starting ground and anyone could get to the top.

End of rant.

Ok my rant isn't perfect but you are right in someways its just movie stars, sports stars and others get paid so much money when they don't really do shit thats what I ment. I know people out there deserve money like fire men, doctors, and cops I mean they put their lives on the line.

The public like them. There's a high demand for them, they get payed a lot.

People cchoose to make them important you know.

Still though. people like paris hilton shows us what I mean.

She's an heiress. She gets her money from her ancestors who worked for it and decided to give it to her. It's a private fortune, I don't feel it my right to decide if her dad gives her money or not.

She is stupid though.

Oh... (I'am an unintelligent boob have mercy on me!!)