Forum Post: Abolish Government Anarchists = Allies of Wallstreet, Corporations and the 1%
Posted 11 years ago on Sept. 6, 2012, 7:38 p.m. EST by Endgame
(535)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Abolish Government Anarchists: "Don't vote. We shouldn't be trying to fix the system by ending the bribery, we should be abolishing government all together. Yes while we tell people not to vote the interests that we are supposidely fighting against will get even stronger and our system will become even more screwed up. But still...Don't vote!"
Wallstreet, Corporations and the 1%: "Holy sh.., Thanks guys!".
Abolish Government Anarchists: "Even though we claim to be nonviolent we will not openly challenge any Anarchists that use violence in their tactics...even though it really hurts the perception of Occupy"
Wallstreet, Corporations and the 1%: "The more extreme you become the better for us. Thanks".
Abolish Government Anarchists: "Even though Occupy has serious issues we need to fix..we're not going to do it. We are just going to blame all of our problems on the corporate media. Yes they are a big part of the problem but we are just going to blame it ALL on the media so we don't have to fix our own problems. We're Anarchists, we don't give a damn about fixing the system"
Wallstreet, Corporations and the 1%: "We love that about you Abolish Government type Anarchists. Keep it up. Thanks".
Abolish Government Anarchists: "This movement started out as an open tent movement but in actuality the REAL Anarchists believe that everyone else in the Occupy movement just need to fall in line and believe in exactly what we believe in. The Anarchists may be the 1% of the 99% but we lead this leaderless movement. You say we deceived the public by not advertising Anarchy and led us to believe that fixing the system was the solution? Well we say deal with it!"
Wallstreet, Corporations and the 1%: "Thanks. We know all about deceit and we have to say you Anarchists pulled this off masterfully. We wish you all the success in world and hope you continue down this path. :) ".
Abolish Government Anarchists: "A year into this movement and we still don't have a core simple message for people to latch onto."
Wallstreet, Corporations and the 1%: "When you guys first burst onto the scene we were scared shitless. We actually thought this movement had real potential to fix the core issue and stop us from being able to pay off elected officials/threatening them with flooding money to their opponents. But now we know you guys are really here just to help us. Keep telling people not to get involved in the electoral process. We agree. Seriously guys, thanks. You guys are awesome. "
"Abolish Government Anarchists" is a bit of a double positive. There are no "pro-government" anarchists. lolz.
The point you seem to avoid is that; it is by participating in the corrupt-system-of-control that is the sham of "democracy", that you lend your power to it. You can not make an anti-egalitarian system work for all,. it is not such a system, by its very basic design. There is no way to reform a system of 'elected representatives' into a functioning just society. It will always enforce its top-down structure that enables the corrupt and power hungry to rule OVER the people. It is not that the Anarchists all got together and conspired to deceive you or anyone else,. it is only that those that understand anarchy see that the Government is not going to be fixed by participating in it, by submission to the authority, and by voting.
You seem to deceive yourself, if you think real change can be made through the voting process, no anarchists "Abolish Government " or not, did this to you,. you did this to yourself.
Real change is made be fixing the core problem. Stopping special interests from bribing and paying off elected officials. Ending that conflict of interests is what will lead to real change. It won't end flip the switch in an instant but it will quickly lead to an environment where we can work to improve our system.
If Occupy would of focused on this being its core message it would have become even larger and more relevant than it is today. Running Occupy candidates that never take any outside money while using the popularity of the protesters and the movement as a whole to boost their candidates publicity. Win or lose in the short term Occupy would of been setting the stage for real change.
But instead now we have a movement that has been taken over by the 1% of the 99%(Anarchists) and because of this the movement in the U.S. has been losing alot of support. People don't believe in the ideals of Anarchy. That is just fact. And as long as we allow that to be the face of the movement Occupy will not succeed. People want ways to fix the system. Not outright abolish government.
But that IS the point; a Government that is top down, a system of "elected representatives", will always lead to the same results,.corruption! There simply is no way to fix a system that is flawed in its basic design.
We need a better system. We need a system where we all have equal power, not a system where we are made to hand our power over to some "representative",. who then runs off and furthers their own interests. This is rather basic and needs to be realized before moving 'forward'.
I have created such a system: http://www.thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com/
Of course we need a better system. But I completely disagree with the assumption that we need to completely end government in order to create the type of system you're referring to. And there is absolutely no way you're going to get the American people on board with something like that.
We can fix all of the corruption by dealing with the root of the corruption. The bribery. Getting outside money out of politics is a huge step to creating the system you're describing.
If you have an ant infestation in your house you deal with the root of the problem and exterminate them at the core of the problem. You don't burn down the whole damn house. That is the problem with the abolish government Anarchist. There solution for solving the problems we have are just unrealistic and to over the top.
jph is saying that the root of the problem is not bribes. He's saying it's the hierarchic structure of the system. Because we give our power to representatives it makes it easy for bribery to come into play, and the more you go towards the top of the hierarchic pyramid, the more bribery is covered up.
If we did not have representatives and we all had a voice, then no one could pay someone with power to make decisions that suit him since there would not be one person with power.
The hierarchic system of representation is what opens the door to corruption. We gave our power away to a few representatives.
The only way to remove money from politics is to remove representatives and make sure everyone has democratic power to participate in decision making.
I see. I still disagree that the bribery isn't the root of the problem but thanks for clearing that up.
I agree that everyone should play by the same rules. Whether you're the President or the janitor at a restaurant. But the bribery is what creates the power difference. Also the lack of involvement in fixing that problem.
But for the sake of the argument lets say that I agree with everything you and jph just laid out. Don't you think it would be more realistic/beneficial to have a more wide open honest discussion about your ideas in a system where elected officials can not be bought? I think the public gets really turned off when Anarchists are seen trying to get them to do what they want them to do. (Its the reason why the movement as of now in the U.S. has been losing support.) At least in a cleaner system with no special interest bribery we would be able to have a more open discussion about ALL ideologies.
No. Bribery does not make the power difference and that's why bribery is not the root of the problem. The President already has more power than the janitor before bribery comes into play. He has power because of the structure of our system which gives it to him. He is at the top of the pyramid of our elected representatives. We give him the power to lead the nation because we accept him as our ultimate representative. This gives him a lot of political power.
Bribery exists because he has that political power that others don't, it's not bribery that gives it to him! The millionaire wants to bribe the President because he has power and can help him, he does not want to bribe the janitor because the janitor has no power.
The whole point that jph was making is that this is impossible. When we give more power to some because we have elected them to represent us, then money will find its way to those people to bribe them. Yes, the system could and should be cleaner, but you'll always have corruption in a system where some men are more powerful than others politically. If some people have more money than others and some people have more political power than others, then it's natural that those with more money bribe the ones with more political power.
I agree with jph that the system is the problem. Bribes and corruption are not the root of the problem, but one of the symptoms of our bad system which is the root of the problem.
In a democracy the people have the real power if we decide to use it. We have to be the ones that force them to stop the bribery. Of course the ones that are in the system and feel the only way they can keep their jobs are by accepting the bribes are going to continue to do so if there is no real push back by the people to stop it(not to mention the ones that like this corrupt system because they thrive in it). Bribery exists because we have been to quiet in dealing with the core problem.
If the state said someone won the lottery and gave them millions of dollars even though theydidn't even buy a ticket, do you honestly think most people would do anything to stop the state from sending them all that money and notify them of their error? No way.
Some corruption and money would find a way even into this cleaner system. But I rather be at 3% corruption than 90% corruption. Just because brushing your teeth may not prevent you from ever getting cavities doesn't mean you stop brushing your teeth all together... And under the system you too are advocating for, what is to stop corruption from plaguing it? I just think the fact that Occupy has been losing so much support proves that people have the same questions I do(that is saying alot since I have been with the movement almost since the very beginning).
I see what you're saying but I guess we just have core difference on what the root of the problem is. And how to fix it. If Occupy would of taken this approach as their core message I strongly believe this movement would be thriving right now instead of weakening.
I'm not advocating for this new system. I don't personally believe it is viable, at least I have not seen it to be in practice. I wouldn't throw away the system of a nation of 300 million people which happens to be one of the richest nations in the world for something that has barely been used in practice. That's suicide!
I was simply clarifying jph's position. I do agree with him that a system of representatives will always be corrupted to a certain extent. I do agree with you that this can be controlled to a degree and that it's most likely possible to bring down corruption to an acceptable level. I see this as a good compromise. Yes, corruption will exist, but we will have the benefits of having representatives (there are many benefits to having representatives!).
The problem with anarchists is that they do not practice what they preach. This is serious. Take this website for example. There is no rotation of personnel. There is one person in charge, jart, and a few moderators who are always the same. This is worse than representatives because they have no term limits! They control the show. It's the same in general assemblies. The anarchists who can go all the time end up being to ones making decisions for everyone else, except they are not named and they don't have term limits. I rather pick my representative and know that he has a term limit.
I don't know what you experience with anarchists are, but I'll tell you, they are some of the most hard headed people I know. Very cult-like. Practically, they are completely different to what they preach. They often resemble totalitarianism. Ironically, they love control.
Tom I really appreciate your insight. Especially your description of the Anarchist. I didn't even look at it in that way. But you laid that out in a very articulate insightful way that I haven't seen before.
Rare posts like yours is partially why I still come to this place.
Thanks. It means a lot to know that at least one user here understands and respects the work of Thrasymaque.
no one is controlling the show
and collusion among the elite
and the FED giving the elite control of the banking system
The Anarchist thought is that you remove the power of these institutions by refusing to participate in them. How can governments and banks directly control you if you give them no power? Voting for another slave master only perpetuates the system of oppression. If the American people are not ready, they can live in slavery until they open their eyes, but I would like to live how I should for the time being.
This is all backwards. There is no movement among the 1% to do away with regulation & licensing. Does big pharma call for the abolishing of the FDA? No. They want regulators because they know they can control them & use regulation to screw us. The advocates of regulation are being played & big time by the corporate interests. They're not afraid of you, they love you guys. It's us free market anarchists that they hate.
If they don't want us to vote then why this? https://my.barackobama.com/page/s/commit-to-vote Get real, the last thing they want is for us to abandon their system.
The 1% have dozens of fake grassroots orgs that push their agenda of ending many govt regulation agencies.
You are mistaken. All funded by industry billionaires. Just like the tea party who protests against all the same regulators.
You disagree?
There is the co-optation of movements like what happened to the Tea Party. It's a way to have a controlled & ineffective opposition.
If you say so.
On the contrary, we need to fix the system rather than throw everything out: bathwater, soap, towels, rubber ducks and babies.
The Arab Spring has been hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood. Our country is under the influence special interest. Idiots would burn down the house to get rid of vermin. That is the lazy way. Americans have to be smarter than that.
Max Keiser Report Fraud on Wheels
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=q8UdlaVU9BI
Couldn't agree more with that analogy. You don't need to throw everything in order to fix the system.
And at the very least in this fixed system where the special interest groups can't buy elected officials,(ironically) the Anarchist would be in on a better footing to be able to spread their ideology. Im not saying it would be successful even in a fixed system but they would have more of a shot than they do now.
Peoples Party Unite! No Diplomatic Immunity for traitors..Peoples Court, No Judge Judy, Public Trials..People we can do a better Job than present government Shills for Corporations..We put in at least one day a month,and replace these do nothings,who want to take it all, and leave us nothing..
People believe whatever the TV tells them to believe.