To my fellow anarchists: How do you pretent get there, to anachy?

[kilgram]

Well, my fellow anarchists, anarchocapitalists, Libertarian, Socialist... what are your ideas about abolishing the state and achieving the goal of anarchism? What are the steps that you would take to arrive there?

Should it be spontaneous? I mean, waiting for the collapse of this system? What? How? When?

[jillian]

socialists are not anarchists.

libertarians aren't supposed to be anarchists... some of them just sound that way.

i distrust anarchists. they make the world a bad place for kids.

[Mainecoons]

Kids are anarchists. :grin:

[nic34]

Not going to happen. Not in the US.

[Mainecoons]

Well, my fellow anarchists, anarchocapitalists, Libertarian, Socialist... what are your ideas about abolishing the state and achieving the goal of anarchism? What are the steps that you would take to arrive there?

Should it be spontaneous? I mean, waiting for the collapse of this system? What? How? When?

Collapse of the system usually leads to tyranny and police states. Not a good way to get to a state with less government.

The happy medium is the restoration of the U.S. Constitution, the most brilliant governing document ever written in history.

[kilgram]

socialists are not anarchists.

libertarians aren't supposed to be anarchists... some of them just sound that way.

i distrust anarchists. they make the world a bad place for kids.
I am Socialist and I am Anarchist.

[KC]

socialists are not anarchists.

libertarians aren't supposed to be anarchists... some of them just sound that way.

i distrust anarchists. they make the world a bad place for kids.

Some socialists are anarchists. The state isn't the only form of collective ownership. Here's the manuscript of an interview with Noam Chomsky (http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/19760725.htm) on the whole idea.

[jillian]

Some socialists are anarchists. The state isn't the only form of collective ownership. Here's the manuscript of an interview with Noam Chomsky (http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/19760725.htm) on the whole idea.

and it's just as "intelligent" and realistic as when the bolsheviks thought the government would just fall away and everyone would sing kumbaya.

how'd that work out? my grandfather didn't think much of the results.

great country, america...

(i dislike chomsky, btw).

[Cigar]

Wake me up when they decide to act rather than talk.

[Gerrard Winstanley]

It would take at least a century, and would involve the spontaneous mobilization of intellectuals, labor unions, radical thinkers, organizers and the state's consent, under pressure, to gradually renege on its existing powers. As that's not going to happen in our lifetimes, anarchists should focus upon combating government interventionism and bureaucracy.

Anybody who claims anarchism is "un-American", inevitably leads to tyranny ... doesn't know what they're talking about. Sorry.

[KC]

and it's just as "intelligent" and realistic as when the bolsheviks thought the government would just fall away and everyone would sing kumbaya.

how'd that work out? my grandfather didn't think much of the results.

great country, america...

(i dislike chomsky, btw).

Well, anarcho-socialism/anarcho-syndicalism aren't exactly my own political views either, but the fact remains that there's nothing contradictory about being an anarchist and a socialist. The two are perfectly compatible within a framework of voluntary socialism, in theory at least.

[nic34]

in theory at least.

That's always the problem.....

[Chris]

socialists are not anarchists.

libertarians aren't supposed to be anarchists... some of them just sound that way.

i distrust anarchists. they make the world a bad place for kids.


Wrong. Some are.

Wrong. Some are.

How do anarchists "make the world a bad place for kids"?

[Chris]

Not going to happen. Not in the US.

Happened once. Can happen again.

[Chris]

Well, anarcho-socialism/anarcho-syndicalism aren't exactly my own political views either, but the fact remains that there's nothing contradictory about being an anarchist and a socialist. The two are perfectly compatible within a framework of voluntary socialism, in theory at least.

So too libertarians who are anarcho-socialists or anarcho-capitalists.

[Chris]

In answer to the question, I don't know, but I think we would have to emulate the blacks in their struggle for freedom and rights.

[kilgram]

In answer to the question, I don't know, but I think we would have to emulate the blacks in their struggle for freedom and rights.
But I think that here there are many people, or I thought that they disagreed with the civil rights movement, or as I say with the social movements.

[Mainecoons]

I doubt there are more than a couple people here who disagree with the Civil Rights movement. A lot of us disagree with reverse discrimination/affirmative action.

[Chris]

^^That, kilgram. To me the Civil Rights movement was grassroots, peaceful. Violent revolution, like the French Revolution, say, seems to me to just replace one evil with another.

[Germanicus]

The Federal Government will call Martial Law at he first sign of serious unrest.

An Executive Order will be made that brings in total communism. Which will be good for everyone.

It is interesting that capitalist 'free market' USA has a plan-B that is total communism. Seems strange right?

And whats with that Peanut Tax you guys have? Seems kinda commie to me.

[Chris]

The Federal Government will call Martial Law at he first sign of serious unrest.

Would the military side with the government or the people?

[donttread]

I'm more of a Constitutionist. We simply need to limit the federal government to its rightful place dealing with other nations and overseeing interstate commerce issues. Which means zero federal involvement with drug policy within the states, education, highways, arts endowments or healthcare for a few examples. And no more imperialism.
Practically speaking the only way to accomplish these goals now is to choke off their money supply and then repeal the 16th.




Well, my fellow anarchists, anarchocapitalists, Libertarian, Socialist... what are your ideas about abolishing the state and achieving the goal of anarchism? What are the steps that you would take to arrive there?

Should it be spontaneous? I mean, waiting for the collapse of this system? What? How? When?

[kilgram]

^^That, kilgram. To me the Civil Rights movement was grassroots, peaceful. Violent revolution, like the French Revolution, say, seems to me to just replace one evil with another.
I believe that violent revolution is not stable and would replace one evil with another like you. But sometimes I think if this thought maybe is wrong. But, after getting more calm, I think that the revolution is possible without violence, but I believe that the anarchism can only be installed through revolution. And it requires a lot of civil movements, and some of those from some point of view are not peaceful, at all.

Obviously I think from a Socialist point of view, I think of methods like strikes, occupations, organizing new ways of doing things...

[kilgram]

Would the military side with the government or the people?
The government like the police. They are their dogs.

[Chris]

I believe that violent revolution is not stable and would replace one evil with another like you. But sometimes I think if this thought maybe is wrong. But, after getting more calm, I think that the revolution is possible without violence, but I believe that the anarchism can only be installed through revolution. And it requires a lot of civil movements, and some of those from some point of view are not peaceful, at all.

Obviously I think from a Socialist point of view, I think of methods like strikes, occupations, organizing new ways of doing things...

Those aren't just socialist methods.

There was a comment earlier how anarchy would take centuries perhaps and that to me sounds reasonable. As I sometimes say I'm an anarchist is theory, minarchist in practice. Any minarchist step toward anarchism, say a return to constitutionalism, as another posted above, where government is at least limited in its powers, is, I think, a step in the right direction. Anarchy never need succeed as long as we're moving in that direction rather than the progressive, statist opposite.

And, kilgram, when we get there, we'll hash out whether the new state-less governance is socialist or capitalist or both.

[nic34]

I'm more of a Constitutionist. We simply need to limit the federal government to its rightful place dealing with other nations and overseeing interstate commerce issues. Which means zero federal involvement with drug policy within the states, education, highways, arts endowments or healthcare for a few examples.

Those are exactly the areas federal and state governments should invest in and regulate. Highways (transportation) to promote commerce and trade,

Jefferson supported free public schools...

Lincoln signed into law the Morrill Land-Grant Acts that created land-grant colleges.

The purpose of the land-grant colleges:

without excluding other scientific and classical studies and including military tactic, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the legislatures of the States may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morrill_Land-Grant_Acts




drug policies and no more imperialism.

Agreed.

[Chris]

Those are exactly the areas federal and state governments should invest in and regulate. Highways (transportation) to promote commerce and trade,

Jefferson supported free public schools...

Lincoln signed into law the Morrill Land-Grant Acts that created land-grant colleges.

The purpose of the land-grant colleges:

without excluding other scientific and classical studies and including military tactic, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the legislatures of the States may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morrill_Land-Grant_Acts





Agreed.




Those are exactly the areas federal and state governments should invest in and regulate. Highways (transportation) to promote commerce and trade,

Roads are good but why government?



Jefferson supported free public schools..

Yes, organized and funded mainly at the country level, with some of those funds given to higher state-level education. He never envisioned a federal system.

[Gerrard Winstanley]

and it's just as "intelligent" and realistic as when the bolsheviks thought the government would just fall away and everyone would sing kumbaya.

how'd that work out? my grandfather didn't think much of the results.

great country, america...

(i dislike chomsky, btw).
The Bolsheviks (communists) believed in the achievement of an anarchist utopia via authoritarian, vanguard government. That's inevitably going to fail, and most anarchists recognize it.

[jillian]

The Bolsheviks (communists) believed in the achievement of an anarchist utopia via authoritarian, vanguard government. That's inevitably going to fail, and most anarchists recognize it.


they were mostly marxist in ideology, believing that the government would, ultimately, fall by the wayside. they also believed what they were told about how no one would be persecuted for their religion any longer. that was a big deal to the jews who joined the bolshevik movement.

and then they found out it was lies.

and they found out no one gives up power willingly

and no one gives up wealth willingly

and there continued to be persecution... even moreso.

my grandfather used to say it was "verse zen tzar".

[Gerrard Winstanley]

they were mostly marxist in ideology, believing that the government would, ultimately, fall by the wayside. they also believed what they were told about how no one would be persecuted for their religion any longer. that was a big deal to the jews who joined the bolshevik movement.

and then they found out it was lies.

and they found out no one gives up power willingly

and no one gives up wealth willingly

and there continued to be persecution... even moreso.

my grandfather used to say it was "verse zen tzar".
Not even Marx urged that the government fall by the wayside. He wanted a strong, directive government to bring about his utopia, tellingly named the "dictatorship of the proletariat". The Bolsheviks didn't seek to do anything voluntarily, they were out to seize and redistribute property.

[Mini Me]

they were mostly marxist in ideology, believing that the government would, ultimately, fall by the wayside. they also believed what they were told about how no one would be persecuted for their religion any longer. that was a big deal to the jews who joined the bolshevik movement.

and then they found out it was lies.

and they found out no one gives up power willingly

and no one gives up wealth willingly

and there continued to be persecution... even moreso.

my grandfather used to say it was "verse zen tzar".

At last! Someone who posts sense!

I am so tired of all this theoretical crap being bandied about. Lets talk about REALITY here, the way things really are!

All movements are about aquiring power and money, and, hence, get corrupted! The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

If you want to know the INTENT of something, just look at the results!

[nic34]

Roads are good but why government?.

Hint: I don't have the money to build my own....




Yes, organized and funded mainly at the country level, with some of those funds given to higher state-level education. He never envisioned a federal system.

That was largely an agrarian society. Things have changed... by about 305 million....

[Mini Me]

The Federal Government will call Martial Law at he first sign of serious unrest.

An Executive Order will be made that brings in total communism. Which will be good for everyone.

It is interesting that capitalist 'free market' USA has a plan-B that is total communism. Seems strange right?

And whats with that Peanut Tax you guys have? Seems kinda commie to me.

Its seems strange because you are totally wrong!

The true purpose of martial law is to protect the assets of the wealthy elite ruling order, not communism.

It seems to me that you call anything you don't understand communism, like so many con holers do.

That is a divergent tactic that the ruling fascist elite use to defray blame away from them.

[Chris]

Hint: I don't have the money to build my own....





That was largely an agrarian society. Things have changed... by about 305 million....


Nor does government have any money.

But you're not answering the question, which is, in general, just because something is good, why leap to the conclusion government must do it?


Time doesn't change principles. Education has been changed, is federal, and is failing. Yet you seem bent on remaining on the same path. --And recall, you exampled your point with Jefferson, I just straighten out what his plan was.

[Gerrard Winstanley]

Its seems strange because you are totally wrong!

The true purpose of martial law is to protect the assets of the wealthy elite ruling order, not communism.

It seems to me that you call anything you don't understand communism, like so many con holers do.

That is a divergent tactic that the ruling fascist elite use to defray blame away from them.
Where do your sympathies lie?

[Codename Section]

https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/999280_272158739602883_1584624767_n.jpg

[nic34]

Nor does government have any money.

But you're not answering the question, which is, in general, just because something is good, why leap to the conclusion government must do it?

Because the government can do it for everyone, including those that don't own asphalt companies. Or need to drive more than a few blocks. Just like national defense. Why is this such a difficult concept?


Time doesn't change principles. Education has been changed, is federal, and is failing. Yet you seem bent on remaining on the same path. --And recall, you exampled your point with Jefferson, I just straighten out what his plan was.

Federal share is only 10%. We have failed public education, public education has not failed us.

Public Ed holds a mirror to social failings of achievement gaps in our schools, and are metrics reflecting the equity and opportunity gaps that exist in society. Until we deal with that....

[nic34]

https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/999280_272158739602883_1584624767_n.jpg


So you'd be happy paying a toll everytime you use a private road or highway?

[AmazonTania]

You already pay tolls for public highways.

[Chris]

Because the government can do it for everyone, including those that don't own asphalt companies. Or need to drive more than a few blocks. Just like national defense. Why is this such a difficult concept?



Federal share is only 10%. We have failed public education, public education has not failed us.

Public Ed holds a mirror to social failings of achievement gaps in our schools, and are metrics reflecting the equity and opportunity gaps that exist in society. Until we deal with that....



Still begging the question, nic. Just because something is good and just because government can do it, why leap to the conclusion government should do it?


Why 10%, it still doesn't fit Jefferson plan you brought up.


Public Ed holds a mirror to social failings of achievement gaps in our schools, and are metrics reflecting the equity and opportunity gaps that exist in society.

Where'd you get that?

Got to love it though, society is to blame for government's failings.

[Chris]

You already pay tolls for public highways.

Yep, taxes.

Perhaps people think what government does is free.

[Codename Section]

So you'd be happy paying a toll everytime you use a private road or highway?

I already do in a lot of places and technically through taxes. Yes. I'd put that little thing on my car and go OR I'd do better and take public transport and save the planet.

:D

[AmazonTania]

Yep, taxes.

Perhaps people think what government does is free.

Um, no. Not just in your taxes.

You do actually pay tolls to use public highways as well. Plenty of tolls charged for state highways, such as route 87 in California when I spent my time there.

[Chris]

^^You're right. Only some are private.