What is anarchism?

mr_ska wrote:

oh yea, sorry bout that.we did kinda get off topic there. so who exactly thought up the theory of anarchism? like whocame out and said it?

Some claim anarchist themes can be found in the works of Taoist sages Laozi and Zhuangzi. The latter has been translated, "There has been such a thing as letting mankind alone; there has never been such a thing as governing mankind [with success]." and "A petty thief is put in jail. A great brigand becomes a ruler of a State.

There's no exact answer, though many say that evidence can be found in Taoist sages. A translated quote comes out to be "There has been such a thing as letting mankind alone; there has never been such a thing as governing mankind with success -- a petty thief is put in jail, a great brigand becomes a ruler of the State". However, the first to describe themselves as an Anarchist was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.

KenCat wrote:

mr_ska wrote:

oh yea, sorry bout that.we did kinda get off topic there. so who exactly thought up the theory of anarchism? like whocame out and said it?

Some claim anarchist themes can be found in the works of Taoist sages Laozi and Zhuangzi. The latter has been translated, "There has been such a thing as letting mankind alone; there has never been such a thing as governing mankind [with success]." and "A petty thief is put in jail. Agreat brigand becomes a ruler of a State.

There's no exact answer, though many say that evidence can be found in Taoist sages. A translated quote comes out to be "There has been such a thing as letting mankind alone; there has never been such a thing as governing mankind with success -- a petty thief is put in jail, a great brigand becomes a ruler of the State". However, the first to describe themselves as an Anarchist was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.

When action conforming to the principal declines, artificial principals of goodness and fairness, prudence and wisdom are invented. These artificial principals soon degenerate into politics. When parents no longer live in ancient natural harmony, they try to make up for this deficit by inventing artificial principals of filial piety and paternal affection. When states had fallen into disorder, they invented the stereotype of the loyal minister.

Reject artificial wisdom and prudence and the people will be a hundred times happier.
Reject artificial goodness and fairness and the people will come back to spontaneous filial piety
Reject artfulness and gain and evildoers will disappear, they will return to primordial honesty.
Renounce these three artificial categories, for the artificial is good for nothing.
This is what you should hold on to:being simple, having few personal interests and few desires

Lao Tzu - Tao Te Ching

so would allowing some privilege for behaving in a way that you approve of, and denying privilege to those who act in a way you don't conflict with the spirit of anarchism?

Oh, and.. bring me to your leader..? o.o;

also, do you guys mind a lot of questions? I find even after I ask a million questions, especially when potentials are involved, I still am not even close to making up my mind.. So I hope that's not too much of a bother.

ultimategoober wrote:

so would allowing some privilege for behaving in a way that you approve of, and denying privilege to those who act in a way you don't conflict with the spirit of anarchism?

Oh, and.. bring me to your leader..? o.o;

Their is no privilege in anarchism. Those who seek to uphold the social conditions that allow privilege and inequality are not anarchists.


Leader ?

ultimategoober wrote:

also, do you guys mind a lot of questions? I find even after I ask a million questions, especially when potentials are involved, I still am not even close to making up my mind.. So I hope that's not too much of a bother.

No problem.

Regarding your other post, many people have the misunderstanding that there are no leaders in an Anarchist society -- we are all leaders.

well, what do you do about those who behave in a way that you do not approve of? say.. a murderer, or a thief?

ultimategoober wrote:

well, what do you do about those who behave in a way that you do not approve of? say.. a murderer, or a thief?

Instead of letting them rot in a prison, we attempt to rehabilitate someone. I would much rather see someone of a mental state that wasn't stable be rehabilitated and have them become a good member of society than for them to get executed or imprisoned.

what do you do if they cannot be rehabilitated?

ultimategoober wrote:

what do you do if they cannot be rehabilitated?

I suppose their family or close friends would have to take care of them. If no one else could, an organization (nor corporation) would be set up to help and take care of people like that.

KenCat wrote:

ultimategoober wrote:

well, what do you do about those who behave in a way that you do not approve of? say.. a murderer, or a thief?

Instead of letting them rot in a prison, we attempt to rehabilitate someone. I would much rather see someone of a mental state that wasn't stable be rehabilitated and have them become a good member of society than for them to get executed or imprisoned.

I think the most crucial thing to remember when debating this subject, is that if nothing else can be done with these people, and if society cannot cope with 'criminals' without a system of laws and enforcement, then we're all fucked. Fourtunately i don't feel this way. I believe there are other, rational solutions to the problem of crime; enforcement through the threat of violence is obviously not one of them, seeing as how it breeds crime more than it prevents it. So what else is there? For one, there is the absolute necessity of economic equality, since poverty also breeds crime through material necessity. This is what anarchists/communists think (and maybe pray) is the most significant cause of crime. What we believe will be left is those spontaneous crimes that arise from the heat of passion and other crimes such as drivin drunk, etc. Those who murder would do so from passion, -- which these crimes should be understood and forgiven (hatred only begets more hatred) so society and the imperfect, unfortunate 'criminal' can continue to function without the need of any outside intervention that would breed conflict -- and also those few that are planned, and malicious; these people should be rehabilitated. How, exactly, these people would be put into rehabilitation i don't know, but it should cater to the needs of society while keeping in mind anarchist principles.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

KenCat wrote:

ultimategoober wrote:

well, what do you do about those who behave in a way that you do not approve of? say.. a murderer, or a thief?

Instead of letting them rot in a prison, we attempt to rehabilitate someone. I would much rather see someone of a mental state that wasn't stable be rehabilitated and have them become a good member of society than for them to get executed or imprisoned.

I think the most crucial thing to remember when debating this subject, is that if nothing else can be done with these people, and if society cannot cope with 'criminals' without a system of laws and enforcement, then we're all fucked. Fourtunately i don't feel this way. I believe there are other, rational solutions to the problem of crime; enforcement through the threat of violence is obviously not one of them, seeing as how it breeds crime more than it prevents it. So what else is there? For one, there is the absolute necessity of economic equality, since poverty also breeds crime through material necessity. This is what anarchists/communists think (and maybe pray) is the most significant cause of crime. What we believe will be left is those spontaneous crimes that arise from the heat of passion and other crimes such as drivin drunk, etc. Those who murder would do so from passion, -- which these crimes should be understood and forgiven (hatred only begets more hatred) so society and the imperfect, unfortunate 'criminal' can continue to function without the need of any outside intervention that would breed conflict -- and also those few that are planned, and malicious; these people should be rehabilitated. How, exactly, these people would be put into rehabilitation i don't know, but it should cater to the needs of society while keeping in mind anarchist principles.

I think most crimes can be understood and dealt with without locking people up. Take a rapist for example, he could be pescribed a drug that would reduce his testosterone. In the case of people with dangerous mental ailments, Im not sure what we would do - I suppose they could be assigned people to take care of them full time as opposed to restricting them to hospital. In any case it would be a potential infringement on the liberty of others to allow people who are a known danger
to walk unchecked within society. I think people should have as much freedom as is possible, however society needs to be kept and safe and everyones freedom respected.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

KenCat wrote:

ultimategoober wrote:

well, what do you do about those who behave in a way that you do not approve of? say.. a murderer, or a thief?

Instead of letting them rot in a prison, we attempt to rehabilitate someone. I would much rather see someone of a mental state that wasn't stable be rehabilitated and have them become a good member of society than for them to get executed or imprisoned.

I think the most crucial thing to remember when debating this subject, is that if nothing else can be done with these people, and if society cannot cope with 'criminals' without a system of laws and enforcement, then we're all fucked. Fourtunately i don't feel this way. I believe there are other, rational solutions to the problem of crime; enforcement through the threat of violence is obviously not one of them, seeing as how it breeds crime more than it prevents it. So what else is there? For one, there is the absolute necessity of economic equality, since poverty also breeds crime through material necessity. This is what anarchists/communists think (and maybe pray) is the most significant cause of crime. What we believe will be left is those spontaneous crimes that arise from the heat of passion and other crimes such as drivin drunk, etc. Those who murder would do so from passion, -- which these crimes should be understood and forgiven (hatred only begets more hatred) so society and the imperfect, unfortunate 'criminal' can continue to function without the need of any outside intervention that would breed conflict -- and also those few that are planned, and malicious; these people should be rehabilitated. How, exactly, these people would be put into rehabilitation i don't know, but it should cater to the needs of society while keeping in mind anarchist principles.

You, my brother, are a true Anarchist. I've seen many Anarchists (and some even on our forums) that believe in the prison system. I stress the fact that we need to remember that crime would automatically be reduced to due the society enabling an easier life for all. For example, someone who would previously steal food would not do so anymore due to the ability to now receive food (and other necessities) in an anarchist society.

^^ Well, thank you Ken. One of my main pet peeves is those of the communist/anarchist persuasion maintaining that communism/anarchism and prison systems are compatible. If ever there is a time when we live in anarchism and a prison system is put into place, i dare predict the end of the anarchy within that society, unless they are able to undo it and free the captives. And if you agree, i would suggest confronting any one of our comrades regarding this dilemma. I truly believe this idea needs to be purged from anarchist thought.

Also, i agree with ink that a balance needs to be struck. We cannot simply allow innocent citizens to be harmed because we don't have the means to stop "criminals" (god i hate that word) from acting in an authoritarian manner. I believe self-defense will be the most used way to prevent a breach of freedom because this is the least authoritarian manner by which to defend oneself.

But really, i don't think this is going to be the problem that it is made out to be. Crime rates in a capitalist society, like america for example, are outrageously high. Even if we were to pluck out the material roots for the majority of these crimes -- poverty -- and allow everyone the means to defend themselves from those who may be disgruntled or something of the like, we have already made great strides towards a society without crime. Any measures taken beyond this will not really be socially necessary, as far as i'm concerned, but rather it will just be a hobby for some people with too much free time.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

^^ Well, thank you Ken. One of my main pet peeves is those of the communist/anarchist persuasion maintaining that communism/anarchism and prison systems are compatible. If ever there is a time when we live in anarchism and a prison system is put into place, i dare predict the end of the anarchy within that society, unless they are able to undo it and free the captives. And if you agree, i would suggest confronting any one of our comrades regarding this dilemma. I truly believe this idea needs to be purged from anarchist thought.

Also, i agree with ink that a balance needs to be struck. We cannot simply allow innocent citizens to be harmed because we don't have the means to stop "criminals" (god i hate that word) from acting in an authoritarian manner. I believe self-defense will be the most used way to prevent a breach of freedom because this is the least authoritarian manner by which to defend oneself.

But really, i don't think this is going to be the problem that it is made out to be. Crime rates in a capitalist society, like america for example, are outrageously high. Even if we were to pluck out the material roots for the majority of these crimes -- poverty -- and allow everyone the means to defend themselves from those who may be disgruntled or something of the like, we have already made great strides towards a society without crime. Any measures taken beyond this will not really be socially necessary, as far as i'm concerned, but rather it will just be a hobby for some people with too much free time.

Like an alternating neighborhood watch?