Skip to main content

Here, as in the preceding articles, it is not a question of philanthropy but of right. Hospitality means the right of a stranger not to be treated as an enemy when he arrives in the land of another. One may refuse to receive him when this can be done without causing his destruction; but, so long as he peacefully occupies his place, one may not treat him with hostility. It is not the right to be a permanent visitor that one may demand. A special beneficent agreement would be needed in order to give an outsider a right to become a fellow inhabitant for a certain length of time. It is only a right of temporary sojourn, a right to associate, which all men have. They have it by virtue of their common possession of the surface of the earth, where, as a globe, they cannot infinitely disperse and hence must finally tolerate the presence of each other. Originally, no one had more right than another to a particular part of the earth. Bolding mine - there's also a lot more context to this...
Kant, 'Perpetual Peace'

 

Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end.
Kant, 'Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals'

I was once a philosophy scholar. I absconded to follow my heart and play music instead, but a strange thing happened when I studied Kant - generally held to be one of the greatest philosophic defenders of Republican capitalism and the supposed Protestant ethic that accompanies. Kant, not Marx, Foucault, Goldmun, Nietzshe, or any other, is responsible for turning me into an anarchist - the content of the above two quotes are why.

1. No one has any natural right to property - the earth is common [whatever rights exist now are artificial - not wrongly so, but not rightly so either].

2. Every human being must be treated as and end in themselves - never as merely a means.

While I certainly had predilections towards anarchism in my youth, and had studied Kant then too, it wasn't until I bounced these two idea off of the epistemological ideas of his First Critique and contextualized them within the secular tradition of the Pre-Socratic Sophists, that I really understood what Kant ultimately implied. Let me repeat:

1. The earth is common.

2. Every human being is an end in themselves, i.e. any hierarchy [social, political, economic] violates universal moral law.

Every position, action and opinion I have is based on these two tenets of Kantian universalism. It is why I am anti-nationalist. It is why I am anti-capitalist. It is why I am anti-religion. It is why I am a pacifist.

It is why I believe our species, for all of it's idiocies, foibles and clear instincts for self-annihilation, should make every effort to preserve itself.

It is why I am a humanist.

It is why I believe that if our institutions fail us, we must forge a new world.

I don't know what that new world looks like, but I've been advocating that since the day I joined dkos in 2004 - before it became a 'democratic party blog'...  While I see that as shortsighted, I don't advocate against it - but I might mock it from time to time.

I'm still here because I want to remind people that there are still greater stakes, and there are greater possibilities. We will certainly live with the consequences of our own current governance, but that doesn't have to obtain.

We just need to stand up, and be human beings, in the face of every instance that seeks our dehumanization.

***Please note the title of this diary is jab at those that believe 'anarchism' has something to do with 'lawlessness'. Anarchism means only one thing - no leaders - an [no] archos [leaders].

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (5+ / 0-)

    “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

    by lucid on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 01:29:57 AM PDT

  •  Pure anarchy is extremely short-lived. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    leftykook

    Gangs soon form for protection and survival. Then bigger gangs. Then another government.

    Warren/3-D Print of Warren in 2016!

    by dov12348 on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 02:59:41 AM PDT

    •  Only if you believe that tribalism (0+ / 0-)

      is the only manner in which you think human beings are capable of organizing themselves. There is nothing 'natural' about tribalism. It's simply how we've chosen to organize ourselves lo these many years.

      “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

      by lucid on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 09:45:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I just gave the reasons. (0+ / 0-)

        Show me a place and era where there was pure anarchy lasting longer than a month.

        Warren/3-D Print of Warren in 2016!

        by dov12348 on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 11:22:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  For one the Paris commune of 1871 (0+ / 0-)

          However, who cares. Just because we haven't organized ourselves in a non-hierarchical manner doesn't mean that we can't or shouldn't.

          “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

          by lucid on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 03:45:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I have given this enormous thought. (0+ / 0-)

            I was a Y2K end-of-the-world guy in 1998-2000.

            Warren/3-D Print of Warren in 2016!

            by dov12348 on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 08:17:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I've given this enormous thought too (0+ / 0-)

              As have human beings going back to at least 600 bce in Athens [the sophists]. If it is the right thing to do, it is our obligation to work toward it. Just because it isn't manifest now doesn't mean it can't be.

              “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

              by lucid on Sat Jul 20, 2013 at 12:16:48 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I was a battle for Seattle guy fwiw (0+ / 0-)

              “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

              by lucid on Sat Jul 20, 2013 at 12:18:00 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Tragedy of the commons refers to limited resources (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    that are overused and eventually degraded or destroyed by too many people deciding it is their right to use more and more of it. Origianlly it was a meadow in early towns open to all but those with more grazing animals crowde out all others. The ocean is today's common that is being abused by overfishing and pollution just because it is perceived as belonging to all so while no natural rights to property are established the result is the same.

    Tea Baggers Unite and follow that lemming.

    by OHdog on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 04:47:46 AM PDT

    •  That assumes that scarcity is constant (0+ / 0-)

      We are already technologically at the point where scarcity doesn't have to exist - it is merely perpetuated to reify our current economic order, which is now the ultimate culprit in the over-fishing situation.

      If we in fact choose to continue with our current economic order, we will find ourselves extinct.

      “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

      by lucid on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 09:53:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Umm... (0+ / 0-)
    2. Every human being is an end in themselves, i.e. any hierarchy [social, political, economic] violates universal moral law.
    Who enforces "universal moral law"?
    On what "universal morality" is it based?

    I know you can't be referring to the physical universe, as math neither needs nor heeds "morality".

    I've seen far, far too many individual " moralities" to believe that there's a common one for the species- I'm pretty sure that each individual pretty much makes it up as they go.

    So, what is this " universal moral law"?

    •  Do unto others (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lucid

      No math required, thank His Noodly Goodness.

      One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain -Bob Marley

      by Darwinian Detritus on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 07:03:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We do (0+ / 0-)

      It is simply the principal of equality. It is our duty as rational beings to create the 'kingdom of ends', as Kant calls it.

      “It takes no compromise to give people their rights...it takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no political deal to give people freedom. It takes no survey to remove repression.” ― Harvey Milk

      by lucid on Fri Jul 19, 2013 at 09:47:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site