Skip to main content

View Diary: We Are a Vision of the Future, On the Black Bloc: Part II (142 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The huge difference between anarchism (6+ / 0-)

    and libertarianism is that libertarianism exalts the individual as the most important thing in and of itself while rejecting the idea of social goods that don't flow out of that ideal.  Anarchism is a communitarian political philosophy that sees social organization as a replacement for government.  Unlike libertarians anarchists don't think that just not having a government will make things better, what will make things better is organizing ourselves outside of the government as communities, not just saying "Yay!  No government!  Everything will be perfect now."  Which is the libertarian line.

    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

    by AoT on Sun May 27, 2012 at 09:31:41 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, but it's still nonsensical and ignores the (6+ / 0-)

      realities of the world we live in and the nature of humans. You can't "replace" government, because whatever you replace it with becomes government.

      And the reason our government is so susceptible to corruption is because people are corrupt, and anything that you replace government with will not only then be the government, but it will also become corrupt.
       

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Sun May 27, 2012 at 09:39:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  for a while, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Horace Boothroyd III, blueoasis

        my sig said "my goal is to make the world safe for anarchy - 4Freedom."

        so it isn't quite fair to say anarchists are ignoring reality; it's more a vision of how things should be.

        Die with your boots on. If you're gonna try, well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

        by Cedwyn on Sun May 27, 2012 at 09:53:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We already have a vision of how things should (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          allergywoman, FG, Annalize5

          be. What's getting in our way? Number one: greedy people. People who put profit above all else.

          What do you suppose we do with all these people? When we replace the government with something better, do you think that greed will cease to exist? Do you think people won't find a way to corrupt the replacement in a way that makes them very wealthy?

          Yes, we know how things should be. And if we were all like me, peace loving tree huggers, anarchy would be easy. But that's not the world we live in. There are more greedy people in this nation than there are pacifists. And yes, pretending that isn't true is ignoring reality.

          P.S. I am not a crackpot.

          by BoiseBlue on Sun May 27, 2012 at 10:18:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's not just that there are greedy people, it's (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cedwyn, wu ming, blueoasis, Renee, glitterscale

            that those greedy people have power and that we've structured our society in way that gives people power.  Take away that power and you get a more equal world.  Wealth isn't a given in society, it's a result of how we are organized.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sun May 27, 2012 at 10:25:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  And what mechanism do you have in place to (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              allergywoman, Annalize5

              ensure that all stays equal? Without government or any authority, what do you have that corrects people when they attempt to gain more power?

              P.S. I am not a crackpot.

              by BoiseBlue on Sun May 27, 2012 at 10:44:37 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Collective ownership for one (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                wu ming

                And I should have talked more about economics in the diary.  A big part of power distribution has to do with economics and the authoritarian nature of our economic system, which was a major problem with the Soviet Union as well.  If you look at where people derive their power it is most often from economic control, take that away and you have far less problems.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sun May 27, 2012 at 11:00:44 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  That doesn't answer the question of how that (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  allergywoman, Annalize5

                  is enforced. It's a simple question.

                  P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                  by BoiseBlue on Sun May 27, 2012 at 11:18:09 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Could you give me an example of what you mean? (0+ / 0-)

                    I don't understand the question.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sun May 27, 2012 at 12:36:24 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I asked what mechanism you have in place to (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      condorcet

                      ensure that the greediest among us do not gain power. You answered that you correct that with collective ownership, but that doesn't answer the question.

                      You say that in your vision, we are all equals. That's a lovely thought, but human nature tells us that we will never eliminate greed among humans.

                      So, without any authority, how do you enforce your vision of equality? What mechanism do you have in place to make sure that the greediest among us don't amass power? Collective ownership does not answer that question, it begs it.

                      You say that if we take away their power it eliminates their power. Without any government or authority, what eliminates their power? What stops them from corrupting your system of collective ownership?

                      Okay, let's put it this way. Let's use the "anarchists won't take out the trash" example. Your answer is collective ownership.

                      Well, that may be fine. I am part owner, but I still don't feel like taking out the trash. So I pay someone to do it for me. I mean, we all presumably have food and other goods that can be traded. So I offer a kid down the street to take the trash out and I'll give him a pineapple whenever he does. So, he does it. (Note, I can't get someone else to do it for me out of the kindness of their heart. They are going to want some kind of currency.)

                      So he's essentially now my employee, providing services that I pay for. What structure do you have in place to make sure that we remain equals, and not two people with an imbalanced and unequal relationship?

                      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                      by BoiseBlue on Sun May 27, 2012 at 12:54:26 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  See? I asked this question almost two hours ago (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        AoT

                        And none of the people advocating for anarchy can answer it.

                        P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                        by BoiseBlue on Sun May 27, 2012 at 01:50:12 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  It was a nice day and I decided to spend it (0+ / 0-)

                          not on the internet.  I don't begrudge you this comment because I've made the same a million times.

                          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                          by AoT on Sun May 27, 2012 at 11:19:31 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Maybe it is because you want a process (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          joe wobblie

                          or "mechanism" for doing something. The question that is more important is what is that something.

                          AOT was talking about economic equality. That could mean many different things depending upon your vision. It could, for example, mean that instead of for profits there are community owned entities like banks, like health care services, like schools, like utilities (or like utilities USED to be). But you could also have income redistribution, or you could have resource allocations, or both using some kind of tax structure. Remember it isn't necessarily so that you lose structure, more that your structure is close to home rather than imposed from some lofty capital building.

                          Remember too, Ghandi's big thing about employment which is another way you could look at AOT's equality. Everybody is provided with gainful employment and the community and the individual is much better for that. The HOW is decided by the community. But the NEED is decided by the vision and the integrity of the members. What has been truly lacking in our communities is the "vision thing" and the lack of ethics and integrity.

                          What would happen, for example, if we owned up to the fact that consumerism is killing us? What would happen if we owned up to the fact that our demand for beef is killing us? What would happen if we owned up to the fact that our government is not protecting us, but opening the gates to harm to us, via FDA and oil extraction and such?

                          But before that could happen, we would have to pull our focus in on something that has not be allowed in the public discourse. It would mean that we have to have more and more diaries like AOT, where we explore the heretofore less explored ideas.

                          We desperately need to pay more attention to that local structure anyway. We are in imminent danger of being ALECed to death by the Kochs.

                          To live a creative life, we must lose our fear of being wrong. -Joseph Chilton Pearce

                          by glitterscale on Mon May 28, 2012 at 11:14:26 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  Well, there's a number of things that stop (0+ / 0-)

                        the accumulation of power.  Let me address an important point first.

                        (Note, I can't get someone else to do it for me out of the kindness of their heart. They are going to want some kind of currency.)
                        Actually there are plenty of examples of people doing social goods for reasons that are neither out of the kindness of their heart nor for currency.  The pay off, since you seem to think that every action requires a pay off, is that you live in a better society because of what you do.

                        Greed requires a social structure that enforces private ownership of property.  If we remove social support for private ownership of property, as opposed to possession, then greed will be minimized.

                        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                        by AoT on Sun May 27, 2012 at 11:18:28 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

          •  That's why the official goal of Russian Communist (0+ / 0-)

            party back in the 20s was to create a new type of people who will not be greedy. We know how that turned out. I don't think anarchism will turn out any differently.

      •  POP! Goes the weasel! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blueoasis

        Keep chasing your tail like that and you'll turn into a pool of melted butter!

        ! The swinistic greed and racial hatred of the American ruling elite is abysmal !

        by joe wobblie on Sun May 27, 2012 at 10:05:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  libertarianism? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis, AoT

      In the US the term libertarian commonly refers to those of a 'conservative' position.  As such it is but a putrid euphemism for 'neo-fascism'.

      ! The swinistic greed and racial hatred of the American ruling elite is abysmal !

      by joe wobblie on Sun May 27, 2012 at 09:58:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site