George Orwell

[Onyx]

OMG this is like a nightmare to me.
What the hell are you freaking Uks trying to make explainations now that you have been exposed as horrid anti jew killing machines?
I told you I would and I have shown to be you.
I will show you to be the pigs over and over and over again.......

What?

 

[MisterBeale]

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 true

Actually what he said was completely false and uneducated, misrepresenting hundreds of well established anarchist intellectuals and philosophers.

If you cannot defend it then you are just as clueless and uneducated as he is. For god sakes, he was defining a distinguished individual as being a ruler

He lost all credibility when he affiliated with a argumentatively broken ideology invented by 19 year old scene kids, which was later adopted by hipster college youth.

WTF are you talking about?

 

[Onyx]

WTF are you talking about?

You had demonstrated little understanding on anarchist thought.

 

[MisterBeale]

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 machine ruling class which enacts population control within that set of arbitrary borders.
.

Most of us agree with the above definition. The irony is, unfortunately, you happen to be an ideologue. You have the strictest interpretation of terms. Anyone that doesn't meet with that interpretation is open to ad hominem attack. I never opened up a salvo of attack on you. In fact, I am mostly impressed with your knowledge and agree with your POV on these topics. I don't know where the hostility is coming from. There are far to many rdeans and gunos at this site for us to be attacking each other.

You posted "I suppose there was never a society without a centralized ruler...." so in response, to just help inform the forum, I suggested that yes, you were probably right, but we have had societies with leaders. This was in post # 80

That wasn't good enough for you. You needed to critique me and tell me how those weren't TRUE, legitimate and pure examples of anarchy. Well duh.

So then I posted that, as my education and training was in government, the philosophy of government, and anthropology, I was merely pointing out how they were as close approximations as are possible in the real world.

The VERY NEXT POST, you contradict yourself, but w/o any examples in post #81

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.

So I respond with an anthropological analysis, in post #84

To which you roundly critique it saying that leaders are NOT the same as political rulers in established states.

. . . . here we come full circle. This was EXACTLY the point I made originally with post number #80, which didn't meet your original purity test.


I am beginning to think you want to be a contrarian just for that sake of making an enemy of someone who would otherwise be a natural ally?


On top of that, your left leaning anarchism is not a voluntary or peaceful anarchism, it is full of shit at times. Some of those "philosophers" that you profess to admire were violent men. They sought to bring about social change by violence. They believed they knew what was best for others. That is the classic mark of a leftist, thinking they know how society should best be ordered more clearly than others. Elitism.

If others think a statist society is best, then you don't pick up a fucking gun and put a bullet in their head to get your way. Only a leftist anarchist stoops to that kind of bullshit. That is what Gipper was getting at. What would the Mennonites say about the "usage of violent force to maintain a set of arbitrary borders for political communities," to your boy Nestor Makhno?

 

[Preacher]

After defeating the Nazi's we thought the worst was behind us, then liberals came to power.

Orwell wrote Animal Farm as well.

The same folks that funded and supported, built up the Nazi's, helped bring the liberals to power as well. They were entrenched long before the national socialists though.


If you want, read a book by Edward M. House.

https://www.amazon.com/Philip-Dru-Administrator-Tomorrow-1920-1935/dp/1495367657&tag=ff0d01-20

Animal Farm was about Communism....National Socialism and Liberalism have NOTHING in common....NS was a 3rd position ideology not left nor right. Oh and no the same people did NOT bring them to power....

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

Trump and his supporters in a nutshell.

Right. That slogan reflects nothing so strongly as it does the Democrats' political correctness program.

 

[MisterBeale]

However my point is most on the right and left are not anarchists. This can't be disputed.

Obviously I do not disagree with that.

Leftist leaders are nothing more than tyrants. They only believe in power and wealth. No different from right wing leaders. Leftism as an ideology has good points as you have mentioned, but in practice it leads to tyranny.

Nestor Makhno, Mikhail Bakunin, Errico Malatesta, and Emma Goldman were not tyrants.

They believed in the exact opposite of power and wealth, which is why they were left wing anarchists. Syndicalists are also described as being left wing anarchists, and there was not any tyrannical rule occurring in Anarchist Catalonia.

There is no such thing as "leftist ideology." Left and right are schools of thoughts, and they provide for a wide range of diversified beliefs.

Those people you list are not leaders of nations. They are minor players you attained very little if any, political power.

Leftism is an ideology as it rightism. Leftism historically has lead to massive death and destruction. Leftism is in control of much of the West today. It has some admirable traits, but again it is ultimately controlled by a few individuals who are entirely corrupt.

 

[MisterBeale]

After defeating the Nazi's we thought the worst was behind us, then liberals came to power.

Orwell wrote Animal Farm as well.

The same folks that funded and supported, built up the Nazi's, helped bring the liberals to power as well. They were entrenched long before the national socialists though.


If you want, read a book by Edward M. House.

https://www.amazon.com/Philip-Dru-Administrator-Tomorrow-1920-1935/dp/1495367657&tag=ff0d01-20

Animal Farm was about Communism....National Socialism and Liberalism have NOTHING in common....NS was a 3rd position ideology not left nor right. Oh and no the same people did NOT bring them to power....

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

 

[Preacher]

After defeating the Nazi's we thought the worst was behind us, then liberals came to power.

Orwell wrote Animal Farm as well.

The same folks that funded and supported, built up the Nazi's, helped bring the liberals to power as well. They were entrenched long before the national socialists though.


If you want, read a book by Edward M. House.

https://www.amazon.com/Philip-Dru-Administrator-Tomorrow-1920-1935/dp/1495367657&tag=ff0d01-20

Animal Farm was about Communism....National Socialism and Liberalism have NOTHING in common....NS was a 3rd position ideology not left nor right. Oh and no the same people did NOT bring them to power....

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

That's not proving your point unless you are saying Prescott Bush helped liberals come to power..

 

[francoHFW]

“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

Trump and his supporters in a nutshell.

LOL, Barak the Magic Negro and the Hildabitch have us fighting in Syria, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. Educate yourself you look stupid.

Barely in Syria. The natives are doing the infantry work and learning that fundamentalism and terrorism suq.. Others, not at all.

 

[francoHFW]

By 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 machine ruling class which enacts population control within that set of arbitrary borders.

Read some books or else you are going to look foolish to anyone with an education in this subject. Don't go saying that anarchism has never worked in history either, because that just proves you do not know very much about history.

And are for unions....today their ideas are Dem. Read some history and I mean real history. Anarchy on a large scale hasn't worked.

 

[francoHFW]

After defeating the Nazi's we thought the worst was behind us, then liberals came to power.

Orwell wrote Animal Farm as well.

The same folks that funded and supported, built up the Nazi's, helped bring the liberals to power as well. They were entrenched long before the national socialists though.


If you want, read a book by Edward M. House.

https://www.amazon.com/Philip-Dru-Administrator-Tomorrow-1920-1935/dp/1495367657&tag=ff0d01-20

Animal Farm was about Communism....National Socialism and Liberalism have NOTHING in common....NS was a 3rd position ideology not left nor right. Oh and no the same people did NOT bring them to power....

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

That's not proving your point unless you are saying Prescott Bush helped liberals come to power..

What liberals lol?

 

[Onyx]

You posted "I suppose there was never a society without a centralized ruler...." so in response, to just help inform the forum, I suggested that yes, you were probably right, but we have had societies with leaders. This was in post # 80

You failed to catch the obvious sarcasm.

There have been numerous societies with leaders and without rulers, and when you have a society without rulers, then you have an anarchy.

On top of that, your left leaning anarchism is not a voluntary or peaceful anarchism, it is full of shit at times.

I am not left leaning.

Now you are engaging in strawman.

Some of those "philosophers" that you profess to admire were violent men.

This is what I am talking about. You do not understand shit about anarchist thought.

Anarchism is not anti-violence.

You have invented half a dozen false definitions for what anarchism is. It is getting ridiculous.

They sought to bring about social change by violence. They believed they knew what was best for others. That is the classic mark of a leftist, thinking they know how society should best be ordered more clearly than others. Elitism.

Trying to destroy the state is self defense. The state oppresses/abuses/controls, and machines always protect themselves. You cannot vote a system out of commission, and believing that you can is naivety.

If you do not believe in fighting for liberty, then you will always exist to be used as a tool.

So why is it elitist to overthrow a state which enslaves human beings and commits atrocious offenses on humanity? Give me a break....

If others think a statist society is best, then you don't pick up a fucking gun and put a bullet in their head to get your way.

Who the hell is talking about killing people for how they think? I never promoted that and neither did any of these men, and doing so in an organized fashion would be statism.

There is nothing wrong with killing people which compose the state, since the machine exists with the sole purpose of conditioning thought, abusing dissenters, and exploiting human beings.

It is the greatest form of self defense to kill a politician.

Only a leftist anarchist stoops to that kind of bullshit.

No, dumbass.

There are anarcho-capitalists which support violently overthrowing the state as well.

What would the Mennonites say about the "usage of violent force to maintain a set of arbitrary borders for political communities," to your boy Nestor Makhno?

Now you are making up new definitions for other words as well.

There was no political community overseeing the free territories. It was a territory of liberated communities that were free, and at liberty to practice individualism and collective voluntary anarchist principals. And yes, the black army defended themselves against the Soviet Union, and fighting back is not statist or elitism.

Well that was a painful butchering of anarchist thought once again. No one informed me that anarchism = pacifism.

 

[Onyx]

That is just a hypocrite

If you believe in forced taxation, then you are not an anarchist. If you believe in forcing people into government education, then you are not an anarchist.

No left wing anarchist ever supported forcing society to adhere to their arbitrary will, besides destroying machines which enslave men (like the shit the syndicalist is advocating in this cartoon)

Please stop while you are behind. You are talking about something you very clearly understand little about.

 

[Onyx]

Anarchy on a large scale hasn't worked.

If I explained to you that it has, which I have already done, you would just repeat yourself the next post.

 

[Onyx]

I am drowning in morons that are more opinionated than they are educated.

 

[owebo]

That is just a hypocrite

If you believe in forced taxation, then you are not an anarchist. If you believe in forcing people into government education, then you are not an anarchist.

No left wing anarchist ever supported forcing society to adhere to their arbitrary will, besides destroying machines which enslave men (like the shit the syndicalist is advocating in this cartoon)

Please stop while you are behind. You are talking about something you very clearly understand little about.

So...you fancy yourself a left wing anarchist.....huh......

 

[Onyx]

So...you fancy yourself a left wing anarchist.....huh......

If you had read, you would of noticed that I stated the exact opposite.

When pushed I tell people that I am an anarcho-capitalist, but I prefer to focus on similarities rather than differences, so I usually reject being labelled with adjectives.

The only distinction between a left and right wing anarchist is the institution of money, and occasionally thought differences on the existence of charities and voluntarily funded public services.

 

[owebo]

So...you fancy yourself a left wing anarchist.....huh......

If you had read, you would of noticed that I stated the exact opposite.

When pushed I tell people that I am an anarcho-capitalist, but I prefer to focus on similarities rather than differences, so I usually reject being labelled with adjectives.

The only distinction between a left and right wing anarchist is the institution of money, and occasionally thought differences on the existence of charities and voluntarily funded public services.

Yes, you clearly stated you're a left wing nut job....

No left wing anarchist ever supported forcing society to adhere to their arbitrary will, besides destroying machines which enslave men (like the shit the syndicalist is advocating in this cartoon)

 

[Onyx]

Yes, you clearly stated you're a left wing nut job....

Highlight the part that says "I am left wing."

By the way, anarchism is not a left or right wing ideology. There are economic systems which can exist in an anarchy which are identified as being either left or right, such as syndicalism (left) and capitalism (right)