Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The closest I've found is the federation of the Greek city states, the Mayan City states, tribal authorities, and probably the most successful example, Viking law
You may find this interesting, Orwell speaking on anarchism in a review of Gulliver's Travels.George Orwell was a proponent of anarchism...
You may find this interesting, Orwell speaking on anarchism in a review of Gulliver's Travels.
Warren is interesting, but anarchy doesn't work
Historically false.
I suppose there was never a society without a centralized ruler....
The closest I've found is the federation of the Greek city states, the Mayan City states, tribal authorities, and probably the most successful example, Viking law
There are thousands of examples.
You do not seem to understand what anarchism is though. Absolutely no rulers, which means no city states or tribal authorities.
Nobody can have the authority to rule over other men, or else you are not adhering to an anarchic society.
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
Trump and his supporters in a nutshell.
No, they are nothing like that. They don't bow down to the rich and famous, like Trump voters who want to serve a dictator. They don't want to wage war on the rest of the world. And they don't believe that education and the educated are stupid (since they can't understand either). Those are Trump voters, scum of the earth.“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
Trump and his supporters in a nutshell.
You don't realize that you have just described democrat voters to a "T"....?
Your comment is ridiculous, dupe. If there's any fascism in the US, it's the bought off by corporations, pander to the greedy idiot, pure obstruction of reform, New BS propaganda GOP. A disgrace. Fits the definition of incipent fascism, with its big orabge idiot "strong man". The ignorant inmates are running it now. Any argument, inmate?You're fascism is the worst of all.....Warren is interesting, but anarchy doesn't work, like communism, because of human nature. Neither does totalitarianism or Reaganism see sig. Only fair capitalism and democracy does, with a state OF COURSE to keep the a-holes in line. History proves it. And your anarchist movement is crap to keep you irrelevant, dupe.If only Americans recognized the tyranny that is our government and the benefits of anarchy.I think that our differences lie in the cause and the remedy.
Perhaps yes, but maybe not so much. Maybe the elites have you thinking that you can't live side by side. Perhaps there are more important issues at stake.
Anarcho-Socialists and Anarcho-Capitalists — Friend or Foe?
Simple Liberty - Anarcho-Socialists and Anarcho-Capitalists
America's greatest thinkers, and rarely do any school children learn of them.
Josiah Warren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lysander Spooner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It's outlier RW nonsense to keep you irrelevant. Anarchy never worked. And you're against unions, an anarchist staple. The good points of those old thinkers was incorporated into socialism. Fair capitalism, that RWers are AGAINST in practice here now.Spooner is interesting to, but a historical figures whose good ideas where incorporated into good politics. NOT the New BS GOP.
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (French: [pjɛʁ ʒɔzɛf pʁudɔ̃]; 15 January 1809 – 19 January 1865) was a French politician and the founder of mutualist philosophy. He was the first person to declare himself an anarchist[1][2] and is widely regarded as one of the ideology's most influential theorists. Proudhon is even considered by many to be the "father of anarchism".[3] He became a member of the French Parliament after the revolution of 1848, whereafter he referred to himself as a federalist.[4]
In other words, he was not an anarchist.
I have been in this community for a long time. I know pretty much all the philosophers, and no anarchist is upholding Pierre-Joseph Proudhon as an ideological figurehead for anarchism.
You do realize it's the 21st century, right? Jesus, read a newspaper or recent poli-sci book...Warren is interesting, but anarchy doesn't work
Historically false.
I suppose there was never a society without a centralized ruler....
The closest I've found is the federation of the Greek city states, the Mayan City states, tribal authorities, and probably the most successful example, Viking law.
"The Icelandic settlers were opposed to a central state dependent on the authority of a lord or king. Writing in the 11th century, Adam of Bremen said of the Icelanders, "they have no king except the law."
A system of laws was set up whereby people were governed by consensus and where disputes were resolved through negotiation and compromise. That is not to say that violence was not employed. Feuds and violence were permissible and even required in order to maintain one's honor in some instances. But adherence to the law was highly regarded, as observed by Njáll in chapter 70 of Brennu-Njáls saga: "With law our land shall rise, but it will perish with lawlessness."
Hurstwic: Viking-age Laws and Legal Procedures
We can see, even today when they threw out central bankers, their suspicion of authority remains very much alive.
An argument can even be made, that our own constitution would not have been as successful as it has been had it not been partially based on the Iroquois Confederation. The further we drift from that model, the more citizens chafe from the authoritarian central government.
He recognized reality. They'd already taken it. Our allies.FDR did give eastern europe back to the communists.
Your comment is ridiculous, dupe. If there's any fascism in the US, it's the bought off by corporations, pander to the greedy idiot, pure obstruction of reform, New BS propaganda GOP. A disgrace. Fits the definition of incipent fascism, with its big orabge idiot "strong man". The ignorant inmates are running it now. Any argument, inmate?You're fascism is the worst of all.....Warren is interesting, but anarchy doesn't work, like communism, because of human nature. Neither does totalitarianism or Reaganism see sig. Only fair capitalism and democracy does, with a state OF COURSE to keep the a-holes in line. History proves it. And your anarchist movement is crap to keep you irrelevant, dupe.If only Americans recognized the tyranny that is our government and the benefits of anarchy.Perhaps yes, but maybe not so much. Maybe the elites have you thinking that you can't live side by side. Perhaps there are more important issues at stake.
Anarcho-Socialists and Anarcho-Capitalists — Friend or Foe?
Simple Liberty - Anarcho-Socialists and Anarcho-Capitalists
America's greatest thinkers, and rarely do any school children learn of them.
Josiah Warren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lysander Spooner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
We are taught conformity through discipline. The philosopher and teacher Jiddu Krishnamurti examined the value of discipline in this lecture on culture.You may find this interesting, Orwell speaking on anarchism in a review of Gulliver's Travels.
Yes, that is interesting.
Hatred and inhumanity are taught. When society upholds itself to a higher set of moral principals, it can condition love and humanity.
it is said that the government is reflective of the people, but in reality the people are reflective of their establishment. The ruling class lies, steals, kills, manipulates, and indulges. Naturally the slaves are going to be an echo of their masters.
Conformity is a powerful force in society, but I believe that conformity is also taught. We have all these ideas put in our heads about all the bad things that will happen if we do not submit. There are forces in this world more powerful than conformity, and they are vastly preferable to anything else. If we can find a way to organize and expose everyone to these powerful emotions and concepts, we can set the stages for human liberation.
I wish to rise above, but the ruling class wants me to squabble under its twisted and destructive empire.
You do realize it's the 21st century, right? Jesus, read a newspaper or recent poli-sci book...Warren is interesting, but anarchy doesn't work
Historically false.
I suppose there was never a society without a centralized ruler....
The closest I've found is the federation of the Greek city states, the Mayan City states, tribal authorities, and probably the most successful example, Viking law.
"The Icelandic settlers were opposed to a central state dependent on the authority of a lord or king. Writing in the 11th century, Adam of Bremen said of the Icelanders, "they have no king except the law."
A system of laws was set up whereby people were governed by consensus and where disputes were resolved through negotiation and compromise. That is not to say that violence was not employed. Feuds and violence were permissible and even required in order to maintain one's honor in some instances. But adherence to the law was highly regarded, as observed by Njáll in chapter 70 of Brennu-Njáls saga: "With law our land shall rise, but it will perish with lawlessness."
Hurstwic: Viking-age Laws and Legal Procedures
We can see, even today when they threw out central bankers, their suspicion of authority remains very much alive.
An argument can even be made, that our own constitution would not have been as successful as it has been had it not been partially based on the Iroquois Confederation. The further we drift from that model, the more citizens chafe from the authoritarian central government.
A couple, 45 years ago lol. And a million History classes, last 16 years ago. I didn't like Poli-Sci much lol. Too theoretical, like you.You do realize it's the 21st century, right? Jesus, read a newspaper or recent poli-sci book...Warren is interesting, but anarchy doesn't work
Historically false.
I suppose there was never a society without a centralized ruler....
The closest I've found is the federation of the Greek city states, the Mayan City states, tribal authorities, and probably the most successful example, Viking law.
"The Icelandic settlers were opposed to a central state dependent on the authority of a lord or king. Writing in the 11th century, Adam of Bremen said of the Icelanders, "they have no king except the law."
A system of laws was set up whereby people were governed by consensus and where disputes were resolved through negotiation and compromise. That is not to say that violence was not employed. Feuds and violence were permissible and even required in order to maintain one's honor in some instances. But adherence to the law was highly regarded, as observed by Njáll in chapter 70 of Brennu-Njáls saga: "With law our land shall rise, but it will perish with lawlessness."
Hurstwic: Viking-age Laws and Legal Procedures
We can see, even today when they threw out central bankers, their suspicion of authority remains very much alive.
An argument can even be made, that our own constitution would not have been as successful as it has been had it not been partially based on the Iroquois Confederation. The further we drift from that model, the more citizens chafe from the authoritarian central government.
Oh, do tell me, how many political science books have you read? How many political science classes have you ever taken in your life?
Name for me a few of the most influential political science books on your thought?
Haven't you ever wondered why there never was a society without any rulers what so ever?
As such, mores, social customs, norms, and even a sort of direct democracy or authoritarian totalitarian will always take root.
Their societies are, by definition, hierarchical and have an organization, a system of leadership.
The biological pecking order is something that is in the DNA, it is part of nature.
The only question we need now address is; how are we going to have this express itself in human society?
Yeah, that is called a leader.In the simplest and smallest societies for which we have accounts, there are men who stand out among their fellows, who take the lead in group activity, whose word is considered to be generally more valuable than that of others, who take on extra responsibility, and who sometimes scheme and work quite hard in order to do so, gaining in return the (often fleeting) esteem of their companions"
In the final analysis, pure anarchy, is impossible. The best that can be achieved is minarchy, or limited confederation.
And you're against unions, an anarchist staple.
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
Trump and his supporters in a nutshell.
Dude, you are way out of whack. MisterBeale knows what he is talking about.. let me read what was going on.. but I know what I said is trueBy the way, before some other uneducated drone like MisterBeale tries to butcher what constitutes anarchist thought, let me explain what it is not.
It is not anti-order, anti-organization, anti-leader, anti-product, anti-hierarchy, anti-government, or anti-establishment.
It is an ideological belief that human beings should be liberated from the control of both men and machines.
Anarchism opposes these two things.
1. Rulers: established authority figures which uses violence to enforce their arbitrary will
2. States: Political communities that maintain a set of arbitrary borders through the usage of violent force, conceptualized philosophically as a machineruling class which enacts population control within those set of arbitrary borders.
Read some books or else you are going to look foolish to anyone with an education in this subject.
