Doomsday currency

[Abegweit]

Yes. I believe what you're saying amounts to saying life is a dictatorship. If that's your definition, fine, but it completely negates any meaning of the word dictatorship.

edit: though if you weren't able to decipher what I said, I take that as a complement

No. What I an saying is that the state is a dictatorship. Life can get along quite well without thugs forcing decent folk to accept their meddling interference in their lives.

 

[_random_]

No. What I an saying is that the state is a dictatorship. Life can get along quite well without thugs forcing decent folk to accept their meddling interference in their lives.

Going by your definition, can you provide some example in the history of human society of this happening?

 

[emzie]

No. What I an saying is that the state is a dictatorship. Life can get along quite well without thugs forcing decent folk to accept their meddling interference in their lives.

Life doesn't get along quite well without top-down enforcement of rules either. I'll direct you to to exhibit A: any species of animal, ever.

 

[Commodore]

Why are you so condescending in your posts Abegweit? The tone of your posts suggests you feel you are somehow more enlightened than the rest of us and leonl just asked you a simple, non-threatening question (which you still have not answered) and you pretty much blew up on him and any other poster that tried to ask you a question. Chill out man. The posters here aren't trying to mock your beliefs, they are genuinely interested in finding out how you think an anarchist society would defend itself.

As for the original question in this thread: I would most likely try to be one of those ne'er do wells that tries to take from others, so bullets would be my currency and killing would be my method of negotiation.

 

[Abegweit]

Life doesn't get along quite well without top-down enforcement of rules either. I'll direct you to to exhibit A: any species of animal, ever.

Indeed. The entire history of the universe is a refutation of the notion that top-down rules ever work.

But I am confused. I thought you defended the state, the top-down major makes-the-world-go-round thingey. Am I wrong?

 

[emzie]

Indeed. The entire history of the universe is a refutation of the notion that top-down rules ever work.

But I am confused. I thought you defended the state, the top-down major makes-the-world-go-round thingey. Am I wrong?

Philosophically, I sympathize where you're coming from. I don't think it has ever been, or will ever be, a possibility for humans.

I defend the idea of the state not in contrast to the alternative, but because I don't believe there is an alternative. Not for us anyway.

 

[Abegweit]

Why are you so condescending in your posts Abegweit?

Just what is more condescending than this post?

The tone of your posts suggests you feel you are somehow more enlightened than the rest of us

Actually, my posts have nothing to do with "enlightened". I am outraged at the systematic attack on human decency which is the state. And I note that you haven't even attempted to refute any of my points. Instead you whine about "simple, non-threatening questions". So tell me, what points haven't I addressed? And do you seriously defend mass murder?

 

[Leonel]

So can I safely assume that an anarchist system has no defense whatsoever in the face of a power mad megalomaniac with a few guns?

 

[Abegweit]

So can I safely assume that an anarchist system has no defense whatsoever in the face of a power mad megalomaniac with a few guns?

Actually, that's a pretty good description of the state.

 

[Leonel]

Actually, that's a pretty good description of the state.

Alright. So how do we preserve an anarchist society?

 

[amadeus]

So can I safely assume that an anarchist system has no defense whatsoever in the face of a power mad megalomaniac with a few guns?

That the state protects against megalomaniacs with guns is debatable.

 

[Commodore]

Just what is more condescending than this post?

Actually, my posts have nothing to do with "enlightened". I am outraged at the systematic attack on human decency which is the state. And I note that you haven't even attempted to refute any of my points. Instead you whine about "simple, non-threatening questions". So tell me, what points haven't I addressed? And do you seriously defend mass murder?

No, in fact I am inclined to agree with you. But this little rant you just directed towards me is a perfect example of what I am talking about. You just completely blew up on me for no reason. I wasn't attacking you or your beliefs. I was trying to get you to calm down and explain your views in a manner that doesn't make you seem like a raving lunatic.

 

[Abegweit]

Alright. So how do we preserve an anarchist society?

By taking care of ourselves. And each other. Why do people think this is complicated?

 

[Virote_Considon]

Really? Mussolini, Hitler and and others seem to have gotten around this detail.

Just a little historical correction: Neither Mussolini nor Hitler were elected.

 

[Abegweit]

Just a little historical correction: Neither Mussolini nor Hitler were elected.

But they got around the detail. Right?

 

[Leonel]

By taking care of ourselves. And each other. Why do people think this is complicated?

Because it seems all it takes to destroy this society is just one motivated, power hungry person and society is full of them.

 

[Ajidica]

Because it seems all it takes to destroy this society is just one motivated, power hungry person and society is full of them.

If Civ4 quotes have taught us anything, you can get more with a kind word and a gun then with just a kind word.

 

[Abegweit]

No, in fact I am inclined to agree with you. But this little rant you just directed towards me is a perfect example of what I am talking about. You just completely blew up on me for no reason. I wasn't attacking you or your beliefs. I was trying to get you to calm down and explain your views in a manner that doesn't make you seem like a raving lunatic.

It would nice if you stopped being condescending. On another note, stuff the crud about "beliefs". There is truth and there is lies. That pretty much sums it up.

 

[Commodore]

By taking care of ourselves. And each other. Why do people think this is complicated?

It's not complicated if there is just one big anarchist society. Where it gets sticky is when an anarchist society comes in contact with a statist society.

How would the two get along? Would the statist society try to dominate the anarchists? Would the anarchists try to foment revolution in the statist society? Could trade be established between the two without the anarchist society being compromised? Who would represent the anarchist society in diplomatic dealings with the statists? If the statists attacked, how would the anarchists defend their society?

I can go on and on with questions like these, and these questions all spawn an infinite number of follow-up questions. That's how it can be complicated.

 

[Elta]

taking care of ourselves. and each other

This is the definition most people of an idealized state.

Essentially what you are saying is that there is no need for rules or enforcement so long as everyone acts reasonable, correct?