For the Anarchists on this site?

[progressive hunter]

Anarchy is the friend of no one with their feet planted on the ground. Anarchy is also the most ancient self-fulfilling prophecy, a snake consuming its own tail. Freedom for the anarchist lasts only as long as the next anarchist takes to loot his home, rape his wife, burn his dwelling to the ground. None of the agents provocateur at work behind the scenes of the Floyd riots are true anarchists because no man in history ever was one. Anarchy is a state of being and an actionable philosophy that requires a hive of human minds drunk on mob insanity to truly desire and to truly bring about. The intelligence behind the Floyd riots? Whoever is running the show is anything but an anarchist. They're far to deliberate, far too strategic and wholly well thought out.

Dude, read the links I posted and stop embarrassing yourself....Anarchy isn't anything like what you've been told it is, by the chattering classes and the educrats.

The theory may not be like he says but the reality is actually just like we're seeing in the riots.

If we had anarchy in North America (no more United States then, right?), then you have anarchy until the biggest guy on the block takes your shit, and I didn't mention in my last post on this but, as night_son accurately states, rapes your wife.

Then what? After he does that to you and your wife, and your friends and their wives, the next thing that will happen is that he'll take your wife. And many wives (not wanting to insult yours so not her) will go voluntarily - they prefer the protection of strength over weak, skinny-jeans-wearing, soy-boys.

Then, you and all your friends get together and decide you're going to work together to fight Mr. Big. And you win. And you get most of your shit back and even your wives. But now you have government: you have a group of people working together to provide the services that they can't provide individually.

If you don't group together to fight Mr. Big, then he becomes King Big and you become serfs.

Either way, anarchy is a wonderful theory but a practical impossibility.

the USA was founded by anarchist,,,and thats proven by the first attempt with the articles of confederation,,,

under the original intent of the constitution you could say we are rational anarchist because we know bad people are out there and we needed some form of government to deal with them,,,

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

That Higgs looks like a strong healthy guy. He must get a lot of exercise wrestling strawmen to the ground.
Very impressive.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Completely useless response. The dream of having my own stuff without intervention from anyone else, and everyone cooperating so we can still innovate in total love and honesty and cooperation is a wonderful dream.

Yeah, a world without Polio vaccines, a duly elected government to control savage criminals, and the ability to regulate products and services in society is so Utopian.....NOT.

You have not lived in anarchy, Ihave, and it SUCKS. It is not paradise, wake the fuck up, dude.

Did the anarchists stop the killing of 6 million jews? Would anarchists ever have been able to stop the killing of a single Jew? Did anarchists stand against any of those atrocities?
It still doesn't matter, though. Anarchy wouldn't last a day.

How many people have been murdered by criminals through out history, dude?

Far more than have been killed by government, I am certain.

 

[mascale]

The most coherent of the anarchists, like myself, show that radical wealth inequality cannot be supportive of an anarchy. Radical Wealth inequality requires oppression. Recent looters react to it, actually clever in Los Angeles. They are said to have known the deployment of police resources, supportive of Amendment One activities. There they go, and mostly to the pricey places.

Anarchists actually oppose that.

Pharaoh just as likely sent Moses on a mission, for example: To create agents of exploitation. Deut 23: 19-20 is not about foreign aid, but is about gouging and screwing one another. The mechanism was usury. Millennia later, Holocaust would be said to have become the outcome. In Roman era New Testament, Matthew 25:14-30 shows how usury works. Households unable to keep up with local prices, would even set their children out of the household, to be left to the fates--and predators. Anarchists are not known to be religious.

Matthew 20: 1-16, sets up a spending-friendly market place. Workers have more to spend than they started with: Regardless if they had worked all the way or not. That marketplace would create volume sales. Lots of production would be necessary. Adam Smith made no such calculation. Karl Marx would proposed centralized credit, taking no note of the usury problem

Both are not unlike anyone else.

Anarchy is Socialist, so not Marxist Communist. Not too many note that, either. A Marxist would not propose an equal amount nationwide stimulus, nor a Gerald Ford, Equal Amount National Tax Rebate. An anarchist could welcome the change. . . .as it would be said.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Teaching is clearly not possible, at any grade level, without the doctoral degree: Unless it is believed that some kids are better than other kids, and that all the other kids are not worth the extra effort. Therein is the concept of oppression, and a relatively anarchist alternative!)

 

[Norman]

Anarchy is the friend of no one with their feet planted on the ground. Anarchy is also the most ancient self-fulfilling prophecy, a snake consuming its own tail. Freedom for the anarchist lasts only as long as the next anarchist takes to loot his home, rape his wife, burn his dwelling to the ground. None of the agents provocateur at work behind the scenes of the Floyd riots are true anarchists because no man in history ever was one. Anarchy is a state of being and an actionable philosophy that requires a hive of human minds drunk on mob insanity to truly desire and to truly bring about. The intelligence behind the Floyd riots? Whoever is running the show is anything but an anarchist. They're far to deliberate, far too strategic and wholly well thought out.

Dude, read the links I posted and stop embarrassing yourself....Anarchy isn't anything like what you've been told it is, by the chattering classes and the educrats.

The theory may not be like he says but the reality is actually just like we're seeing in the riots.

If we had anarchy in North America (no more United States then, right?), then you have anarchy until the biggest guy on the block takes your shit, and I didn't mention in my last post on this but, as night_son accurately states, rapes your wife.

Then what? After he does that to you and your wife, and your friends and their wives, the next thing that will happen is that he'll take your wife. And many wives (not wanting to insult yours so not her) will go voluntarily - they prefer the protection of strength over weak, skinny-jeans-wearing, soy-boys.

Then, you and all your friends get together and decide you're going to work together to fight Mr. Big. And you win. And you get most of your shit back and even your wives. But now you have government: you have a group of people working together to provide the services that they can't provide individually.

If you don't group together to fight Mr. Big, then he becomes King Big and you become serfs.

Either way, anarchy is a wonderful theory but a practical impossibility.

Wrong....Nearly all anarchists are peaceful people who want nothing more than to mind their own business and be left alone.

You talk about gubmint as though if we didn't have it, some despotic King Big would take over and make us serfs....Well what the fuck do you call what we have right now?....According to your description, we have anarchy via bureaucracy and technocracy....And we're all forced to pay for it and knuckle under to its arbitrary demands, under the threat of physical aggression to play along with its arbitrary and capricious edicts.

But muh freeeeeeedumb!

It would be better if those people used the anarcho-capitalist label. Antifa folks want to destroy everything to the point of lawlessness. That's because they are losers and they believe if they destroy everything they will wake up at a higher spot in the hierarchy.

 

[Oddball]

Anarchy is the friend of no one with their feet planted on the ground. Anarchy is also the most ancient self-fulfilling prophecy, a snake consuming its own tail. Freedom for the anarchist lasts only as long as the next anarchist takes to loot his home, rape his wife, burn his dwelling to the ground. None of the agents provocateur at work behind the scenes of the Floyd riots are true anarchists because no man in history ever was one. Anarchy is a state of being and an actionable philosophy that requires a hive of human minds drunk on mob insanity to truly desire and to truly bring about. The intelligence behind the Floyd riots? Whoever is running the show is anything but an anarchist. They're far to deliberate, far too strategic and wholly well thought out.

Dude, read the links I posted and stop embarrassing yourself....Anarchy isn't anything like what you've been told it is, by the chattering classes and the educrats.

The theory may not be like he says but the reality is actually just like we're seeing in the riots.

If we had anarchy in North America (no more United States then, right?), then you have anarchy until the biggest guy on the block takes your shit, and I didn't mention in my last post on this but, as night_son accurately states, rapes your wife.

Then what? After he does that to you and your wife, and your friends and their wives, the next thing that will happen is that he'll take your wife. And many wives (not wanting to insult yours so not her) will go voluntarily - they prefer the protection of strength over weak, skinny-jeans-wearing, soy-boys.

Then, you and all your friends get together and decide you're going to work together to fight Mr. Big. And you win. And you get most of your shit back and even your wives. But now you have government: you have a group of people working together to provide the services that they can't provide individually.

If you don't group together to fight Mr. Big, then he becomes King Big and you become serfs.

Either way, anarchy is a wonderful theory but a practical impossibility.

Wrong....Nearly all anarchists are peaceful people who want nothing more than to mind their own business and be left alone.

You talk about gubmint as though if we didn't have it, some despotic King Big would take over and make us serfs....Well what the fuck do you call what we have right now?....According to your description, we have anarchy via bureaucracy and technocracy....And we're all forced to pay for it and knuckle under to its arbitrary demands, under the threat of physical aggression to play along with its arbitrary and capricious edicts.

But muh freeeeeeedumb!

It would be better if those people used the anarcho-capitalist label. Antifa folks want to destroy everything to the point of lawlessness. That's because they are losers and they believe if they destroy everything they will wake up at a higher spot in the hierarchy.

Agree....But say "ancap" or "agorist" and eyes glaze over...We're completely losing the language, like both Orwell and Rand predicted....Getting scary.

 

[Oddball]

the USA was founded by anarchist,,,and thats proven by the first attempt with the articles of confederation,,,

under the original intent of the constitution you could say we are rational anarchist because we know bad people are out there and we needed some form of government to deal with them,,,

Circular reasoning....People are bad, so we need a gubmint made up of....wait for it.....people.

The gubmint monopoly on the judicial system has become just as corrupt and despotic as every other aspect of The State.....While it's fair to argue that a totally market-based judicial system would have its own set of problems, I'd take a verdict from a jury of professionals over the system we now have, where people are screened out of the jury for being too smart and independent thinking.

 

[Levant]

the USA was founded by anarchist,,,and thats proven by the first attempt with the articles of confederation,,,

under the original intent of the constitution you could say we are rational anarchist because we know bad people are out there and we needed some form of government to deal with them,,,

So what you're saying is that there are as many fake anarchists here as there are fake conservatives. All that shit Oddball gave me about anarchists was a crock of shit because none of you really believe it. Sounds a lot like Antifa to me.

 

[Levant]

Yeah, a world without Polio vaccines, a duly elected government to control savage criminals, and the ability to regulate products and services in society is so Utopian.....NOT.

You have not lived in anarchy, Ihave, and it SUCKS. It is not paradise, wake the fuck up, dude.

How many people have been murdered by criminals through out history, dude?

Far more than have been killed by government, I am certain.

You haven't been following along. I've been pretty solidly critical of anarchy and have demonstrated that it can't possibly work.

 

[Levant]

The most coherent of the anarchists, like myself, show that radical wealth inequality cannot be supportive of an anarchy. Radical Wealth inequality requires oppression. Recent looters react to it, actually clever in Los Angeles. They are said to have known the deployment of police resources, supportive of Amendment One activities. There they go, and mostly to the pricey places.

Anarchists actually oppose that.

Pharaoh just as likely sent Moses on a mission, for example: To create agents of exploitation. Deut 23: 19-20 is not about foreign aid, but is about gouging and screwing one another. The mechanism was usury. Millennia later, Holocaust would be said to have become the outcome. In Roman era New Testament, Matthew 25:14-30 shows how usury works. Households unable to keep up with local prices, would even set their children out of the household, to be left to the fates--and predators. Anarchists are not known to be religious.

Matthew 20: 1-16, sets up a spending-friendly market place. Workers have more to spend than they started with: Regardless if they had worked all the way or not. That marketplace would create volume sales. Lots of production would be necessary. Adam Smith made no such calculation. Karl Marx would proposed centralized credit, taking no note of the usury problem

Both are not unlike anyone else.

Anarchy is Socialist, so not Marxist Communist. Not too many note that, either. A Marxist would not propose an equal amount nationwide stimulus, nor a Gerald Ford, Equal Amount National Tax Rebate. An anarchist could welcome the change. . . .as it would be said.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Teaching is clearly not possible, at any grade level, without the doctoral degree: Unless it is believed that some kids are better than other kids, and that all the other kids are not worth the extra effort. Therein is the concept of oppression, and a relatively anarchist alternative!)

You're full of shit. What you describe is not socialism but is quintessential Karl Marx. To say that different wealth isn't compatible with anarchism means, "to each according to their need, from each according to their ability." If your crop sucks even for reasons beyond your control, and I get a bumper crop, I must share mine with you. Where's the anarchy in that?

The truth comes out here more and more with each post on the thread. Anarchists don't at all believe in anarchy; they're entitled, gimmee, hypocritic, socialists or communists.

 

[mascale]

Levant-Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Even the US federal government subsidizes farmers--and the intent is market-friendly. The one neighbor can't spend, more likely the crop of the other neighbor rots, unused. The Great Recession happened, and the Great Depreciation--spending unfriendly catastrophes.

Levant-Ignorance support of the mutilation of one neighbor's babies genitalia--with basis in drought or other circumstance--is obvious and clearly oppression-level reasoning.

Levant is now on record supportive of baby genital mutilations.

In the Matthew 20: 1-16 example: Some workers desperate started work early on. Some workers satiated could wait until the last hour. There is a disparity of circumstances noted. At the end of the day, disparities could be remedied--even through usury--or re-satiation could happen. The Anarchist support of individual differences is accommodated. Radical Wealth inequality is not therein supported.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Deut 23: 19-20, is not about foreign aid, ignored by Karl Marx in Manifesto, even--who did create a Centralized Credit agenda.)

 

[progressive hunter]

the USA was founded by anarchist,,,and thats proven by the first attempt with the articles of confederation,,,

under the original intent of the constitution you could say we are rational anarchist because we know bad people are out there and we needed some form of government to deal with them,,,

So what you're saying is that there are as many fake anarchists here as there are fake conservatives. All that shit Oddball gave me about anarchists was a crock of shit because none of you really believe it. Sounds a lot like Antifa to me.

how would you know what we believe???

then again you can always prove us wrong,,,
and remember its you dems and repubes stealing and abusing the people in this country not us,,,