Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
It is impractical,l yes. If it was successful it would take away all services provided by the government. No insurance, banks,... Police would disappear, hospitals would disappear, because the employees are on the paycheck of the government.
I, for one would love to be an anarchist, for a short while, it would be a great way to protest. Belgium hasn't got a government right now, the Flemish and the French Belgians can't agree with each other and that's the reason Belgium hasn't got a government, and that's been dragging on for more than a year. (I think at least over 2 now) So, Anarchy as a way to protest may get those politicians to come together and and start agreeing. The Anarchy on the streets will force them to agree.
Simple ideas about people usually fail because people are complicated and unpredictable. Anarchism means many different things, but if you mean it as a way for a society to work through mutual co-operation without centralised authority, I think that is pretty unlikely to work because of human nature. Other forms of anarchy to the best of my knowledge would be even worse for people in general, so I am against anarchism.
Scrazza wrote:So, what are your views on Anarchism?
Goes something along the lines of "Stay away from me"
While I might complain about some specifics, I like my government protection thank you very much. Having absolutely none would not be a life I would WANT to live in comparison to the one I have right now.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Scrazza: What you describe (Disatisfaction with government and the desire to engage in violent activity to "get them to listen to you") comes across to me as "I'm politically immature and want to throw my toys out of the pram and set fire to other people's stuff rather than negotiate!"
Da Boss wrote:Scrazza: What you describe (Disatisfaction with government and the desire to engage in violent activity to "get them to listen to you") comes across to me as "I'm politically immature and want to throw my toys out of the pram and set fire to other people's stuff rather than negotiate!"
No. I have no intention to be violent about it. If people would just renounce authority for a short time, The politicians would eventually HAVE to agree, and coordinate something to get back some authority on the people. So, basically, I meant to go on a 'peacefull anarchist way'. I have no intention to get people to act like animals and go like "Hey, there, cops, lets kill 'em!". I just want it to be a 'wake-up call' to the politicians to start working on a government.
Does that still sound immature to you?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/01/19 20:10:50
Not as immature, but how would you protest? Refuse to pay taxes? Ignore road signs?
Geniune interest, I can't see how a peaceful protest against political inaction is particularly anarchist- sounds pretty democratic to me, really!
(I feel your pain though- I was really shocked to read about the situation!)
Anarchy as in a system (or lack there of) by which to "run" a peaceful utopian society...I don't see it happening.
Anarchy as a by product of Nihilism...perhaps,but then it simply leads to a system in which the strongest rule.
I am both selfish and chaotic. I value self-gratification and control; I want to have things my way, preferably now. At best, I'm entertaining and surprising; at worst, I'm hedonistic and violent.
Not as immature, but how would you protest? Refuse to pay taxes? Ignore road signs? Geniune interest, I can't see how a peaceful protest against political inaction is particularly anarchist- sounds pretty democratic to me, really! (I feel your pain though- I was really shocked to read about the situation!)
Well, refuse to pay taxes would be one way. and just don't do what authority tells you. True, it would form dissorder, but it will reinforce my ideas that the politicians of the two communities will have to work together to get rid of the anarchy. The politicians do not want this, and will speed up their negotiations. A temporary gorvernment will be formed, that could be the base of the new and, maybe, succesfull Belgian government.
also true, one cannot controll the masses of anarchists, so it would be likely that there will be violence. But I do not want to achieve violence with my idea.
Scrazza wrote: The Anarchy on the streets will force them to agree.
Or shoot you, if you are of insufficient number, and lacking in popular sentiment
now, see, violence CAN NOT be crossed out with Anarchy. But, as I said above, one cannot control it. If some radicals are willing to lay down there lives for it, so be it, their stupid idea. The anarchy on the streets will also lead to violence from other cultures, who have no intrest in Anarchism. More violence. The cops will shoot, yes. If you follow the news here in Belgium, you will learn that when a police officer shoots a civilian it will be looked down upon. That cop will lose his job, and will be hated by a lot of people. In Belgium, authority in the form of police can't really do anything against killings, they just clean up. Yes, the killer will be punished, and put into jail. If he's lucky, he will be out of prison in three to ten years. Completely different than in America I understand. The fact that police and justice hasn't got any real power in Belgium is a reason why I want a solid government.
A short, anarchy filled period, in a contained community would help a lot to 'force them to form a government.
And how can it be deomcratic? People will not listen to anyone with an amount of authority. People will just do what it needs to get their goals. My goal is the forming of a government.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/01/19 20:41:22
What you really want Scrazza is passive resistance & civil disobedience, which while they might technically be anarchy, are still not full blown anarchy.
Catachan LIX "Lords Of Destruction" - Put Away
1943-1944 Era 1250 point Großdeutchland Force - Bolt Action
"The best medicine for Wraithlords? Multilasers. The best way to kill an Avatar? Lasguns."
"Time to pour out some liquor for the pinkmisted Harlequins"
No, that's the point. Everyone else has answered from the POV of "If this is what you mean, then blah, but if you mean THIS, then blah blah."
You've then elaborated and clarrified your definition of anarchy to lead to a more useful discussion of what interests you.
Progress! It's not all about deforestation and genetically engineered super frogs you know.
Da Boss wrote:No, that's the point. Everyone else has answered from the POV of "If this is what you mean, then blah, but if you mean THIS, then blah blah."
You've then elaborated and clarrified your definition of anarchy to lead to a more useful discussion of what interests you.
Progress! It's not all about deforestation and genetically engineered super frogs you know.
ah.
and to show you guys what one my problems is with the Belgium 'government in the making, I provided a video of the much debated druk minister, speeching. A drunk minister.
this dates from jaunuary 2010, but the problems he 'describes', and how he wants to solve them still linger on. Please watch till the end, and laugh at Belgiums rediculous state. (subtitles are in there)
Scrazza wrote: If people would just renounce authority for a short time, The politicians would eventually HAVE to agree, and coordinate something to get back some authority on the people. So, basically, I meant to go on a 'peacefull anarchist way'.
Have fun accomplishing that without instituting some form of authority.
Scrazza wrote:
Does that still sound immature to you?
It sounds even more immature to me.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Ah, Anarchy: The anthem of the angsty fourteen year old. Hobbes referred to the state of being without government as the 'state of nature'. He proclaimed it to be nasty, brutish and short. Though I despise my government in it's present form, absolute absence of rule is just outright stupid and childish to desire. Where are the roads? Who's going to look at you if you got sick? What protects you from animals, or other people? How about while you're asleep? More importantly, what protects your precious anarchy? All I have to do is persuade one other person to help me, then all of a sudden I'm twice as powerful as you. Anarchy just went out the window, because I have a following and am building power. No, the only way we could ever maintain anarchy is if we had some sort of powerful force keeping it in that state. That would be fascism though.
No, I think I'll leave Anarchy to the guys in the Dead Kennedy's shirts with the electric blue mohawks, thank you very much.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/01/19 21:52:17
Can't a 16 year old like me, start to be politically engaged without his ideas told to be immature?
And, like I said, it's just supposed to last a month if not shorter, so that the politicians will come to their senses. It's not meant as an outright revolt. Don't you guys read what's in here? I do not wish for copmlete absence of rule, I want it to be a message. and Daedalus, I have no fascist ideas running round in my head and am not as radical as the 'Dead Kennedy's ' you describe.
If it would last long, than there would just be gangs everywhere, claiming control. I do not advocate this, nor I want it, but is that fascist to you?
Self-organizing networks are more efficient. The fall of the Vanguardist USSR and the failure of all command economies shows the limitations of archist organization. There was a reason that both the fascists and communists cracked down on the anarchists in Spain, Germany, and Russia.
The fact is that we live in a hybrid archist/anarchist world is often over-looked. You want to see how anarchy looks? Look out the window, unless such an action is impossible without the express orders of your superior.
A young person can be politically engaged without being called immature or having their ideas called immature.
If the young person themselves is mature and well spoken, with mature ideas.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Catachan LIX "Lords Of Destruction" 
