Anarchism...

[Eviscerater]

I think that anarchism is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Anarchism is reactionary, 'this government sucks so let's get rid of government.' Sure it sounds fun but there is a reason why anarchism has never prospered or being taken seriously.

Anarchy is destructive, it wants to tear down the government but replace it with... nothing. In that sense it is fatalistic, and also parasitic as it wants the advantages of a society but none of the obligations or responsibilities.

No-one wants unnecessary government authority or bureaucracy, but hierarchies and authorities inevitably and naturally develop due to the inherent difference in peoples' strengths and abilities. In an anarchic society, the strong would simply abuse and control the weak.

It's much better and healthier all round for us to accept inherent inequalities and develop specialized hierarchies where each individual can attain success in their own specialized field.

 

[Death Aflame]

I think that anarchism is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Anarchism is reactionary, 'this government sucks so let's get rid of government.' Sure it sounds fun but there is a reason why anarchism has never prospered or being taken seriously.

Anarchy is destructive, it wants to tear down the government but replace it with... nothing. In that sense it is fatalistic, and also parasitic as it wants the advantages of a society but none of the obligations or responsibilities.

It replaces government with decentralized direct democracy, it is not simply a Hobbesian state of nature, chaos or what have you. It is highly organized and based on distributing power equally amongst its members so that everyone has a say in how their community is run.

No-one wants unnecessary government authority or bureaucracy, but hierarchies and authorities inevitably and naturally develop due to the inherent difference in peoples' strengths and abilities. In an anarchic society, the strong would simply abuse and control the weak.

Anarchism is against illegitimate/irrational authority (i.e. hierarchy) it is not against legitimate authority (experts, doctors, etc.). More to the point, it is also not necessarily against free markets (see Mutualism) but it is against the Capitalist form of markets. Even under anarcho-communism individual ability is certainly an attribute cherished by all theorists of anarchism that would not be hampered under any properly implemented anarchist society.

What you seem to want is a meritocracy, which is something that only works in theory. The hierarchies that you claim naturally develop under capitalism are more or less the result of a lack of equality of opportunity than any inherent ability or lack thereof in particular individuals.

And no the strong would not simply control the weak, again this is not a Hobbesian state of nature that we are talking about. Anarchism is self-governance based on decentralization, solidarity, mutual aid, voluntary associations and direct democracy. And like any decent society, there would be laws in place. Anarchism may be against oppression, but we have to keep in mind every form of social structuration is going to have oppression, it is more a matter of having a society in which illegitimate oppression is minimized, while the safety of the community's inhabitants is maintained.

 

[SarahC]

In theory I like anarchy, though it would most likely be pretty chaotic in practice, so it's probably best if we keep it in theory.

 

[derek]

Untenable because people like me would take advantage.

 

[Azraelscross]

the Anarchy i know is a classless system in which a commune/area works together for everyone's benefit and any decisions that need to be made are voted and discussed by either everyone or a rotating*ie each time its a different group of people in that area* council. Trade and exchanges of ideas along with all tech we have at the time its put into place will of course still be around

I'm an Anarcho-syndicalist by trade. is it possible within my lifetime? Most definitely not. but i will try my damnedest to further it as a legitimate choice for people to make

 

[Balkanisches_Schwein]

people are too evil and too stupid to function like that. people need lousy governemt, religion, big brother to hold things together. even though it's killing us and we don't know shit. there are much more sheep in this world that those who think with their own heads.

 

[derek]

By current estimates somewhere around 1,202,920,000. Considering that the world population is 6,706,993,152 (July 2008 est.), there is every chance that there are more people with the ability to free think than there are sheep.

 

[Balkanisches_Schwein]

By current estimates somewhere around 1,202,920,000. Considering that the world population is 6,706,993,152 (July 2008 est.), there is every chance that there are more people with the ability to free think than there are sheep.

haha, I like your optimism!

 

[Meh]

By current estimates somewhere around 1,202,920,000. Considering that the world population is 6,706,993,152 (July 2008 est.), there is every chance that there are more people with the ability to free think than there are sheep.

Considering the fact that far too many people expect government to help them casts a question mark over such a optimistic position.