|
| 16 Sep 2011 03:31 PM |
Honestly I would be an anarchist If I believed every single faction would behave.
Wat do? If big faction goes an K1LL N0BI Faction? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 16 Sep 2011 03:33 PM |
| Also erm technology would advance at the rate of DarkAges Europe. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 16 Sep 2011 04:22 PM |
| Grim is a perfect example of a person with spock in a perfect world syndrome. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Warrab
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Oct 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2390 |
|
|
| 16 Sep 2011 04:54 PM |
| Grim, that just sounds GREAT, but that's where its greatness ends. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 16 Sep 2011 11:21 PM |
The whole 'factions against factions' argument is BS. When we establish the rule that all is for all, and completely abolish the state and capitalism, war itself will become completely unnecessary, except as a means of self-defense. Competition, not cooperation, has been at the heart of all wars, and has very rarely been instituted in by the masses, against the masses. ------------ Why are you so oblivouse?
Just the fact you would pick up arms to destroy organization if you had the chance for your ideals completely derails your idea that everyone will follow the rules.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
Jagex88
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 1392 |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 07:08 AM |
So, In anarchy, I can do whatever the f0ck I want? Feels Good Man. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
Jagex88
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 1392 |
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 06:30 PM |
As long as you don't intend to infringe on the liberties of others, I don't care what you do. ----------- How can you stop them?
If somehow the world did end with all government collapseing how do you intend to keep peace?
How do you intend to make a perfect world?
take the mongols
They went accross asia saying give us half your food or we take it all.
Your commune wouldent be so free and dont use that B.S that you would be able to defend yourselves against a far larger group.
Also dont use the B.S that every commune will work togeather the truth is they may not want to or may hate you.
Just the idea that you could collapdse all government is lolful. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
Warrab
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Oct 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2390 |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 06:49 PM |
| I never argue with grim about communism or anarchism because both his and my arguments would be entirely theoretical. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 06:51 PM |
>If somehow the world did end with all government collapseing how do you intend to keep peace?
Federation. It's how the medieval communes and guilds maintained their liberty and right to self-jurisdiction, even after being taken by the helm of the prince. ---------------- A federation?
I garantee anarchists would not be the first to take power if government went away.
>How do you intend to make a perfect world?
I don't. I intend to make the world better by removing hierarchical institutions that condemn man to a life of unpleasurable drudgery.
>They went accross asia saying give us half your food or we take it all.
I doubt that Mongol hordes would rise up and demand food in today's day and age, especially when we have the capability of providing for all, making such an occurrence unnecessary. You can suppose whatever you please, but it most likely won't happen. You authoritarians are growing increasingly mad with your scenarios. ---------------- Of course mongols wouldent arise you would have groups of peaple who want your land and guess what can get plenty of peaple who are just like them.
It wouldent be todays day and age you have no supercorporations supplying food and I doubt m
Your never going to bring anarchy to reality without some form of world changeing event that wouldent change the world for better.
Why do you underestimate a humans capacity for brutality? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 06:58 PM |
I never argue with grim about communism or anarchism because both his and my arguments would be entirely theoretical. ------------- Well its technicly not possible to win against him.
He usually denounces my idea that it wouldent be har to strong arm smaller groups into my group.
Thus adding to my power and makeing it easier to strongarm.
Y can not my federation squash urs grim? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Warrab
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Oct 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2390 |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 07:01 PM |
| It's also historical fact that the most successful, richest, and most developed nations in the world have been capitalist nations, by far. Problem? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 07:05 PM |
>I garantee anarchists would not be the first to take power if government went away.
Absent the centralized state, communities will set up the institutions that they require to fulfill the common needs of the masses. This assumption is not grounded merely in theory; it has a strong basis in historical fact. The medieval communes and cities I've mentioned were built upon federation and horizontal, non-hierarchical, organization, and maintained this until they began to decline. -------------------- You mean the aristocracys?
They did what they did because if they dident the aristocrats would kick them out or punish them not for any type of pride.
>Why do you underestimate a humans capacity for brutality?
Because we aren't brutal. Never, in all of human history, has individual competition and war been the norm. Wars were always fought by a privileged warrior class against another privileged warrior class, the masses usually continuing with their daily toil. -----------------
Man has fought wars over everything from food to land and ideal or just pure stupidity and you expect this to stop now?
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 07:10 PM |
>Y can not my federation squash urs grim?
Why compete when you can cooperate? I'm not denying that you could act in a way that's detrimental to society, but I'm questioning why you would. I heavily doubt that any scenario that you can muster up would ever occur. -------------------- You just said that I can act in a way thats detrimental to society.
Why cant others?
>It's also historical fact that the most successful, richest, and most developed nations in the world have been capitalist nations, by far. Problem?
In recent times, sure, but, again, citing Kropotkin and Mutual Aid, species and societies built on cooperation are more successful than those built on competition. --------------- Nope not recently.
Even the US, the paragon of individualism and capitalism that it is, contains great infrastructure that was built through (albeit involuntary) mutual aid and support through taxation. --------------- (albeit involuntary)
That doesnt make me feel comfortable. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 07:15 PM |
>Man has fought wars over everything from food to land and ideal or just pure stupidity and you expect this to stop now?
With the abolition of the institution that is necessary to start wars? Yeah. --------------- LOLOOLLOLO!!!!!!!!
Pre civilization human fought wars lol war has gone on since man knew how to hit someone with a big rock or a stick.
>They did what they did because if they dident the aristocrats would kick them out or punish them not for any type of pride.
Nope. The medieval city was not built on aristocracy. Village-communities federated by their own volition. --------------- Ahh pre darkage which was still pretty darkage europe.
Yeah they got killed up pretty bad by the roman empire...
Who started much like those communities...
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Sep 2011 07:36 PM |
>You just said that I can act in a way thats detrimental to society.
I'm asking you why you would act in such a way, knowing that people might retaliate. --------------- Because you arent going to get rid of all bad peaple. -------------- >Nope not recently.
Yes, recently. "...within the tribe the rule of 'each for all' is supreme, so long as the separate family has not yet broken up the tribal unity." ---------
In the Medieval City, merchants acted more as trustees, with the city itself buying what it required, and dispensing it through the merchants. ---------- Capitalism anyone? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|