Forum Post: anarchism
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 8, 2011, 9:39 p.m. EST by assasin
(25)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
are any anarchists on wall street.
Public Forum
2 comments 4 weeks ago by gsw
1 comments 4 months ago by factsrfun
5 comments 1 year ago by agkaiser
6 comments 1 year ago by grapes
15 comments 1 year ago by gsw
12 comments 1 year ago by BrentWeirick81
30 comments 2 years ago by ChicagoCitizen
48 comments 2 years ago by factsrfun
16 comments 2 years ago by factsrfun
2 comments 2 years ago by ChicagoCitizen
2 comments 2 years ago by ChicagoCitizen
8 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
7 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by grapes
6 comments 2 years ago by haightashbury98
51 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
5 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
14 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
7 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 3 years ago by agkaiser
6 comments 3 years ago by agkaiser
What does anarchist mean?
an·ar·chist
noun
1. a person who advocates or believes in anarchy or anarchism. 2. a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed. 3. a person who promotes disorder or excites revolt against any established rule, law, or custom.
"Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses - not some farcical aquatic ceremony ". Dennis discusses anarchism with King Arthur: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVA
Note which side offers the violence.
yes - mob rule is what you are advocating
no it is someone who advocates the destruction of the monopoly on violence that is the state. for a true anarchist violence and coercion are a last resort and only used if someone has used coercion or violence against you.
sure it does.
it is think about it. if you don't pay ur taxes u get attacked thrown in a cage and left 2 rot. al capone just shot you to get his dues.
If you don't pay your taxes-they give you a job in government.
And no one "attacks you and throws you in a cage".
And this is a helpful analogy how?
LOL and yes the cops do for tax evasion 2% of the time.
It seems to me this definition is lacking.
That definition is definitely lacking. It means someone who wants a society based on mutual aid and cooperation instead of a few people at the top making rules for others. It does not mean a lack of order or structure. The order and structure come through voluntary association and self-organization. An-archy means without hierarchy.
The anarchists I have run across are not that deep. They are lacking a lot.
Perhaps you haven't read David Graeber's work? It's also your responsibility to make it to the crossroads. Don't wait for them to come to you, go to the library and find them.
Perhaps you are right. I don't need a book on anarchy to decide if it is right or wrong. I've seen and talked to the people involved. The most eloquent book written on the subject is lost on the fact that mostly chodes follow its ideology.
I don't believe a system of organization can be inherently right or wrong, but that's another discussion altogether. Let's just say that the terms anarchy and hierarchy are not limited to the field of politics. They can be used in music for example, or any other system that is structured.
Oh you mean like bands and how the members operate and manage the band?
I think we have all, at one point in history seen one of our favorite bands crash and burn from chaos. Jim Morison comes to mind.
See the problem "anarchists" cannot grasp: you really don't have the ability to protect yourself from all entities with the capability to reach you. Who fights for those who cannot? How about the elderly? Single women living alone? It's a fun concept thought up by boys with one foot still planted in their cap gun and cowboy hat past(18-30).
No, I meant how notes are organized.
In the classical tradition and most traditional music around the world, notes are organized as scales or modes which are hierarchic patterns. In modern music like that of the Viennese School, they are organized with a dedocaphonic pattern (twelve-tone) which is essentially an anarchy as each note has the same importance.
You could also argue quite convincingly that Kandinsky brought anarchy to painting by following a similar ideal to that of Shoenberg in music.
My point was simply that your definition was lacking, not that an anarchic political system tends to be good or bad. It think it's important to agree on definitions before we get into that complex discussion.
BTW - Putting quotes around the world anarchists might seem cute, but in the end it only serves to alienate you from the discussion since you are essentially demeaning others for no significant reason. I'm not here to proof my ideals, but to learn. I don't consider myself an anarchist by any means, but that doesn't stop me from being interested in the true meaning of their system.
What if anarchy is the wrong notes arranged in the wrong order? Good music has to sound good or appeal to the majority of the audience.
If you are a musician, than you must be knowledgeable of Shoenberg's twelve-tone music so I assume you can understand my comparing it to a system of anarchy in which no element is placed on a higher or lower plane of importance than others. You must also be knowledgeable of the precise definition musicians use when they talk of noise, not the definition most people think of. Again, my point was to help others understand anarchy. If you already know what it is, then we don't have much else to discuss. Finally, noise does not mean unorganized. You can have very precisely organized noises. Shaeffer did this back in the 50's with his music consisting of door squeaks.
I do. What I am saying: Not everyone has a mind for music.
Noise has a particular meaning for musicians. We call noise a sound which does not have a fundamental note. For example, the sound of a TamTam, or that of splashing water. Are you familiar with George Antheil? He is one of the most important American composers. He made some pieces using Jet engines. Not notes, just noises. We musicians consider it music. Actually, the definition we use is simply organized sound, but then, John Cage even challenged this idea.
I too am a musician. There is a time and place, and it appeals to someone. However, you cannot base or operate a society on noise
Ah yes, the all too common Ad Populum.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html
I don't submit to that fallacy. Vanilla Ice has been heard and appreciated by more people than Bach's Cello Suites, but I don't believe this means Vanilla Ice's music is of better quality.
Wrong notes in the wrong order? Well, that would simply depend. If each note is given the same amount of importance, if they are structured in an anarchic fashion, then it's anarchy. If not, then it's hierarchic. The structure will not determine if the music is good or not. Music is not simply mathematics.
An example speaks louder than words. Why not listen to Dérives by Pierre Boulez. It is considered a masterpiece of modern music. Une incontournable. The notes are structured in anarchic fashion, but the rhythms, tone colors, etc... are not. Please note, by anarchic I do not mean unorganized, simply not hierarchic. Boulez is extremely structural, he bloomed in the 50's during the age of structurism and was highly influenced by Stockhausen. He takes great care in organizing his notes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJKeduGRAZY
That's where you are wrong. Random notes placed in random order is not music. It is noise. No matter how much emphasis you place on each single note.
I found a more thorough list of fallacies for you. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#composition
At its core, anarchy is the opposite of hierarchy. The word comes from the Greek word anarkhos which is made up of 'an' = without, and 'arkos' = chief, ruler. It is a system where everyone is on an equal plane of control, a system without hierarchy.
Anarchies are very difficult to implement and scale, but not impossible. If violence is often associated with anarchies, it is due from a demonization of the word by hierarchic powers who wished to remain in place. It's quite sad actually. Violence is a theme both found in hierarchies and anarchies.
As an example, the modern western couple is usually organized as an anarchy. The man and woman are on the same level. They discuss issues and make decisions together. Contrastingly, in a muslim family, the father is the head of the household. This is an hierarchy.
It sure lacks any logical foresight. And those who cannot understand the concept or follow the norms, what happens to them?
Most everyone can understand a concept if it is well explained. That is why we are here explaining it, no?
I've already thought it through. I am just waiting for you to see it. All these radical social experiments have been tried and failed many times throughout human history. You boys are not onto something new or cutting edge.
What do you do with the mentally challenged? What about the disabled?
I'm not a OWS supporter, nor an anarchist. I was simply posting to help other readers understand the true definition. If you already know what it is, no need to post. I agree with you that an horizontal political structure has many pitfalls, mainly the problem associated with scaling. However, I believe a type of hybrid modular structure could be feasible. That is what exists where I presently live, in Bali, Indonesia.
OIC. I thought you were advocating it. Sounds to me that you may actually be a conservative, whether you are aware of it or not. The common form of anarchy would be to the extreme right. Scale it back to the left about five ticks and you have conservatism. However, the form of anarchy most OWS supporters envision is the version on the left.
Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - Killuminati ft. Gaje http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLUpGGmku8g
Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - Change (Killumination version) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SMrnx6nkRw
Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - The inevitable incredible truth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wg1bH6-1YY
Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - The all seeing eye http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgKS4i-u0OM
http://www.reverbnation.com/Killumination
http://www.soundcloud.com/Killumination
Donate!!!
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=NKRL8TGE95H2Y
Anarchists is too general a term. I suspect that the movement was inspired, to great extent, by Anarcho-Communism and Social Democracy. The movement, as it evolves into a political movement, as I suspect it will, will be heavily leaning toward the creation of a Social Democratic Party.
We have too many trying to associate themselves with this group. Clearly most people do not support violence as a tactic we are prepared to use. Violent and non violent people are not compatible in one group. A split is inevitable. Let's do it now. Your name says all we need to know.
it is just my handle, it don't mean i'm violent. i support the RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE
See how the images we project effect our ability to attract support from the people we would like to have supporting us? Mr. SELFDEFENDER?
If you look, talk, act, different than you are, are you trying to sandbag people? Don't hoist the skull and bones if you aren't trying to capture my boat. Ye might soon be feeding the fishes, Matey
i like assassins creed so sue me
You pay your price.
Just the few smashing windows on the eve of G20 gathering.
what im doing is anarchist. go here, look at what i did to obamas dog. http://gracieaffirmations.com/Video_Affirmations.html lol more to come. lol im such a brat.
In what capacity? Anarchism runs the gamut... Troll?
any sect mutualist, individge, socialist,
And you set out to assassinate whom?
no1 wat?
[Removed]
Here, in America, we have freedom of speech. That means that I can call you an anarchist if I want to. I don't have to ask for your permission, or make sure that MY definition of what an anarchist is agrees with YOUR definition of what an anarchist is.
If I believe that you are "seeking to overturn, by violence" something that I believe is a "constituted form of society or government" "with no purpose of establishing any other system in it's place" OR that you are "promoting disorder or exciting a revolt against any established rule, law, or custom"-I can call you an anarchist. I can also call you a variety of other unpleasant and derogatory things.
So, you may think the definition is "lacking" and that your deep philosophical thoughts should be taken into consideration before using that term, but most people just compare the word, and it's accepted definition with your behavior and call it what it is.
i support the end of government, yes. because one group should not have a monopoly on the "legitimate use of violence"
It means a totally unworkable in the real world, childish, bottom line stupid pipe dreams.
it is no but government is
Hardly, just ask our friend from Canada, thrasymaque...he knows what's best for all.
Not always, but usually.
How do you envision realizing global anarchy?
The first step would be to annihilate double postings. The second step would be to follow the link below.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/what-does-it-mean-to-you/#comment-318738