Discussion on Anarchy

There is no compromise in the defense of the earth.

Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see it, either way.

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 06:09:10 AM

Anarchy does not mean no order. It means order through parallel structure.
I am talking about the war in Iraq.
The US gov't has killed tens of thousands of people (Nicaragua, Hiroshima) for no apparent reason, or to protect the investments of capitalists.
No, government is not pure evil, it is unneeded.
Not all anarchists are punks. Noam Chomsky ain't no punk.

Chomsky is a libertarian, not an anarchist.

Bible should be read in school. SO kids can see how fucked up that shit is.

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 02, 2007, 11:07:38 AM

There is no compromise in the defense of the earth.

Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see it, either way.

Says you.
Remember spain 1936?
Student communes of France?
That is bullshit when people say nothing can happen in a short period of time.

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 02, 2007, 11:07:38 AM

There is no compromise in the defense of the earth.

Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see it, either way.

Whoops, I left out a few key words.  I hate it when I do that.  Let me fix it...

"Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see the end of it all [the earth], either way.

Quote from: cadmium_blimp on May 02, 2007, 11:09:06 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 02, 2007, 11:07:38 AM

There is no compromise in the defense of the earth.

Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see it, either way.

Whoops, I left out a few key words.  I hate it when I do that.  Let me fix it...

"Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see the end of it all [the earth], either way.

Well, how Bush is going...

Quote from: cadmium_blimp on May 02, 2007, 11:12:26 AM

Quote from: cadmium_blimp on May 02, 2007, 11:09:06 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 02, 2007, 11:07:38 AM

There is no compromise in the defense of the earth.

Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see it, either way.

Whoops, I left out a few key words.  I hate it when I do that.  Let me fix it...

"Why not?  You're obviously not going to be around to see the end of it all [the earth], either way.

Well, how Bush is going...

Well, with how Kim Ill is going...

Well, with how Osama is going...

Well, with how the Saudi Royal Family is going...

Well, with how Tony Blair is going...


Means absolutely SHIT.

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 01, 2007, 06:02:12 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 05:56:58 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 01, 2007, 05:51:18 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 05:50:22 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on April 30, 2007, 07:00:28 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on April 30, 2007, 05:29:11 AM

Quote from: Engy Baby on April 28, 2007, 01:34:14 AM

Even if true anarchy could work I don't think I'd actually want it, I'm pretty comfortable with being "ordered" around, makes things a lot simpler.

Or your afraid of change. or something.
Just because you "like being ordered around" doesn't mean you have to ruin the future of the world

Or something? I like your uncertainty, lol. She is not uncertain about anything, she is comfortable with the current government and does not favor Anarchy. How is that uncertainty?

Anarchy is not the future of the world, unless the fate of the world is pure chaos.

What, the same governments that are estimated to have killed 200 million people in the 20th century?
Oh yea. I feel real freakin safe with those bastards in power.
Bush running illegal wars. FBI rounding up environmentalists and trying to put them in jail for life.
Blair playing along with Bush's antics.
And I am only talking about thew "free" nations of the world.

Once again. All better than anarchy.

So what your saying is, it is alright that governments kill millions of people. Including the most "free" nations of the world.
Wow, you make a lot of sense.
First, you think just because there is not police, people just start randomly killing each other, so you are against anarchy being integrated into society. Then, you say it is alright that governments kill people. Wowzers.

Anarchy = no order. Which equalls many deaths in the long run.

Also, your assumptions about our government are not backed up by support. If you are talking about the War on Terror, then we have somewhat of a right to kill people. IT'S A WAR. If you're saying that the government has gone and killed millions of people without any real specific or a hidden reason, then you are clearly mistaken. I'm sorry, I don't believe your pseudo-punk bullshit about how the government is pure evil. I'm not that naive.

Anarchy does not mean no order. It means order through parallel structure.
I am talking about the war in Iraq.
The US gov't has killed tens of thousands of people (Nicaragua, Hiroshima) for no apparent reason, or to protect the investments of capitalists.
No, government is not pure evil, it is unneeded.
Not all anarchists are punks. Noam Chomsky ain't no punk.

No, Noam Chomsky probably is 'no punk.' But, he has spawned a manifest of retarded anarchist wannabes such as yourself, all of which have no idea how badly the fabrics of society would be fucked up if Anarchy were in place.

No, Noam Chomsky probably is 'no punk.' But, he has spawned a manifest of retarded anarchist wannabes such as yourself, all of which have no idea how badly the fabrics of society would be fucked up if Anarchy were possible.

Fix'd.

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 06:09:10 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 01, 2007, 06:02:12 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 05:56:58 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 01, 2007, 05:51:18 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 05:50:22 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on April 30, 2007, 07:00:28 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on April 30, 2007, 05:29:11 AM

Quote from: Engy Baby on April 28, 2007, 01:34:14 AM

Even if true anarchy could work I don't think I'd actually want it, I'm pretty comfortable with being "ordered" around, makes things a lot simpler.

Or your afraid of change. or something.
Just because you "like being ordered around" doesn't mean you have to ruin the future of the world

Or something? I like your uncertainty, lol. She is not uncertain about anything, she is comfortable with the current government and does not favor Anarchy. How is that uncertainty?

Anarchy is not the future of the world, unless the fate of the world is pure chaos.

What, the same governments that are estimated to have killed 200 million people in the 20th century?
Oh yea. I feel real freakin safe with those bastards in power.
Bush running illegal wars. FBI rounding up environmentalists and trying to put them in jail for life.
Blair playing along with Bush's antics.
And I am only talking about thew "free" nations of the world.

Once again. All better than anarchy.

So what your saying is, it is alright that governments kill millions of people. Including the most "free" nations of the world.
Wow, you make a lot of sense.
First, you think just because there is not police, people just start randomly killing each other, so you are against anarchy being integrated into society. Then, you say it is alright that governments kill people. Wowzers.

Anarchy = no order. Which equalls many deaths in the long run.

Also, your assumptions about our government are not backed up by support. If you are talking about the War on Terror, then we have somewhat of a right to kill people. IT'S A WAR. If you're saying that the government has gone and killed millions of people without any real specific or a hidden reason, then you are clearly mistaken. I'm sorry, I don't believe your pseudo-punk bullshit about how the government is pure evil. I'm not that naive.

Anarchy does not mean no order. It means order through parallel structure.
I am talking about the war in Iraq.
The US gov't has killed tens of thousands of people (Nicaragua, Hiroshima) for no apparent reason, or to protect the investments of capitalists.
No, government is not pure evil, it is unneeded.
Not all anarchists are punks. Noam Chomsky ain't no punk.

No, Noam Chomsky probably is 'no punk.' But, he has spawned a manifest of retarded anarchist wannabes such as yourself, all of which have no idea how badly the fabrics of society would be fucked up if Anarchy were in place.

1. i don't particularly support many of Chomsky's positions. And I did not know who he was until a year ago. I have been an anarchist for much longer.
2. all these arguements of human nature fail. I am a part of the human race. I do not want to randomly kill people. You are a part of the human race, do you want to randomly kill people? Man could not possibly live as a social animal if he lived in a world of universal antagonism. Social life is made possible by our knowledge that most people most of the time are not going to hurt each other or steal from each other. Without that assurance all social life would come to a standstill and there would be no agency or organization of any kind that could bring peace and order out of such a situation.

Man is a social animal and for the most part he will live in cooperative, peaceful relations with his neighbors. It is in this fact of nature, and not some supposed magical power of government, that we discover the essential ingredient for understanding social stability. People by their nature get along with each other. Government doesn't bring them together or keep them together. People live social lives because it is to their advantage to do so. Government doesn't create order out of chaos. The order of social life is already here.

Who said anything about people randomly killing other people?  Aside from you, that is...

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 02, 2007, 02:51:35 PM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 06:09:10 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 01, 2007, 06:02:12 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 05:56:58 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on May 01, 2007, 05:51:18 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on May 01, 2007, 05:50:22 AM

Quote from: Vauxhall the Vampire on April 30, 2007, 07:00:28 AM

Quote from: _MarquisDeSade on April 30, 2007, 05:29:11 AM

Quote from: Engy Baby on April 28, 2007, 01:34:14 AM

Even if true anarchy could work I don't think I'd actually want it, I'm pretty comfortable with being "ordered" around, makes things a lot simpler.

Or your afraid of change. or something.
Just because you "like being ordered around" doesn't mean you have to ruin the future of the world

Or something? I like your uncertainty, lol. She is not uncertain about anything, she is comfortable with the current government and does not favor Anarchy. How is that uncertainty?

Anarchy is not the future of the world, unless the fate of the world is pure chaos.

What, the same governments that are estimated to have killed 200 million people in the 20th century?
Oh yea. I feel real freakin safe with those bastards in power.
Bush running illegal wars. FBI rounding up environmentalists and trying to put them in jail for life.
Blair playing along with Bush's antics.
And I am only talking about thew "free" nations of the world.

Once again. All better than anarchy.

So what your saying is, it is alright that governments kill millions of people. Including the most "free" nations of the world.
Wow, you make a lot of sense.
First, you think just because there is not police, people just start randomly killing each other, so you are against anarchy being integrated into society. Then, you say it is alright that governments kill people. Wowzers.

Anarchy = no order. Which equalls many deaths in the long run.

Also, your assumptions about our government are not backed up by support. If you are talking about the War on Terror, then we have somewhat of a right to kill people. IT'S A WAR. If you're saying that the government has gone and killed millions of people without any real specific or a hidden reason, then you are clearly mistaken. I'm sorry, I don't believe your pseudo-punk bullshit about how the government is pure evil. I'm not that naive.

Anarchy does not mean no order. It means order through parallel structure.
I am talking about the war in Iraq.
The US gov't has killed tens of thousands of people (Nicaragua, Hiroshima) for no apparent reason, or to protect the investments of capitalists.
No, government is not pure evil, it is unneeded.
Not all anarchists are punks. Noam Chomsky ain't no punk.

No, Noam Chomsky probably is 'no punk.' But, he has spawned a manifest of retarded anarchist wannabes such as yourself, all of which have no idea how badly the fabrics of society would be fucked up if Anarchy were in place.

2. all these arguements of human nature fail. I am a part of the human race. I do not want to randomly kill people. You are a part of the human race, do you want to randomly kill people? Man could not possibly live as a social animal if he lived in a world of universal antagonism. Social life is made possible by our knowledge that most people most of the time are not going to hurt each other or steal from each other. Without that assurance all social life would come to a standstill and there would be no agency or organization of any kind that could bring peace and order out of such a situation.

I see a flaw in your statement already. It is evident that no man can simply remain calm and confident during times of uncertainty (and believe me, a world ruled by anarchy would define uncertainty). Perhaps we are sane people who do not wish to kill others now, perhaps we will never want to kill others, but I am positive that people do kill other people, IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. With no order, no government, and no law, these people who kill other people would be free to kill even more people. And the people who don't kill other people just because they are scared that they will get sent to jail will not be afraid of killing people.

Man is a social animal and for the most part he will live in cooperative, peaceful relations with his neighbors. It is in this fact of nature, and not some supposed magical power of government, that we discover the essential ingredient for understanding social stability. People by their nature get along with each other. Government doesn't bring them together or keep them together. People live social lives because it is to their advantage to do so. Government doesn't create order out of chaos. The order of social life is already here.

How naive can you be? People don't get along at all. Humans are competitive beings, and competition leads to rivalries and hatred. Who raised you, a retard? Go outside and watch people, tell me if they all get along. War is evident because people don't get along. Man slaughter is evident because people don't get along. You know how many years our world has gone without war? Around 380 or so. Now, you tell me that humans get along 'for the most part.'

Hmm let me put it this way my favorite t-shirt says
       
 
                              See the music!
                              At  T.N.O.O.A.C
                             

              (The National Organisation of Anarchists Conference)


P.S. No, I won't explain it.

I'm reading a book written by an anarchist at the moment on how to free yourself from the shackles of society. He's got some interesting ideas, I'll give him that

Hey 11-D. Does ur name refer to m-theory or to super gravity theory?

I once studied a philosophy called The Fourth Way which suggested that all life in the universe was used as a source of energy to feed the real galactic inhabitants. Mankind could not see the truth, in fact he is asleep and dreaming that he exists in his world where in reality all life existed in a kind of anarchy. The reality of their existence was that mankind and all life on his planet, were simply cattle who were routinely slaughtered and their energy used to feed the moon, which was a higher being of the galactic reality.

In short, mankind is asleep and dreaming he is in control of his life and thus like a drunken sleepwalker all humanity caroms out of control whilst egsisting in anarchy.

I once studied a philosophy called The Fourth Way which suggested that all life in the universe was used as a source of energy to feed the real galactic inhabitants. Mankind could not see the truth, in fact he is asleep and dreaming that he exists in his world where in reality all life existed in a kind of anarchy. The reality of their existence was that mankind and all life on his planet, were simply cattle who were routinely slaughtered and their energy used to feed the moon, which was a higher being of the galactic reality.

In short, mankind is asleep and dreaming he is in control of his life and thus like a drunken sleepwalker all humanity caroms out of control whilst egsisting in anarchy.

"Goodbye, Mr. Anderson."

This thread should be dedicated to ME!

This thread should be dedicated to ME!

Yes because you are a bastion of reason in a world without it. 

Actually it should. Our dear friend Francois is a market anarchist.

Actually it should. Our dear friend Francois is a market anarchist.

Crock. Of. Shit.

Be nice Mids

Fuck that.

Fine don't then. See if I care.

No one really does, that's the joke.

Ah fuck off to bed already

And here's a gem of wisdom to all you debating half-brains:

Anarchy, as a literal reality, doesn't exist. Prove me wrong. (goes to raise kids and age)

What do you mean by that?

Quote from: GeneralGayhand on May 10, 2007, 03:37:55 AM

Actually it should. Our dear friend Francois is a market anarchist.

Crock. Of. Shit.

Yea, obviously you know me better than I do.

(in case you're too stupid to detect it, that was sarcasm)

BTW, if I am lying about being a Market Anarchist, then that message board I own, the web site I wrote about it, the three blogs I write for, and the book currently in pre-publication are all lies too. Pray tell, why would I waste so much energy and money on something I know is pointless (according to you)?

You're just a liar who puts a lot of effort in