Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Anarchy, no really.

Posted 2 years ago on May 5, 2012, 4:06 p.m. EST by richardkentgates (3269)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

There seems to be a lot of people that relate to this topic much the same way they relate themselves to society, by trend and superficial connections. It's sad that so many offer so little in the way of integrity but that's another issue all together. I do want to help you make it past the misconception of Anarchy brought on by the shallow thinkers of our day. I'll start with the general definition.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy

1
  a : absence of government

  b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority

  c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2
 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order

 b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

As you can see, violence is not part of the definition. Violence may come as a result but human nature is all that's needed for violence, with or without anarchy. So now let extend our look into the concept of anarchism as applied to society and/or ideology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

Anarchism as a social movement has regularly endured fluctuations in popularity. The central tendency of anarchism as a mass social movement has been represented by anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism, with individualist anarchism being primarily a literary phenomenon which nevertheless did have an impact on the bigger currents and individualists also participated in large anarchist organizations. Most anarchists oppose all forms of aggression, supporting self-defense or non-violence (anarcho-pacifism), while others have supported the use of some coercive measures, including violent revolution and propaganda of the deed, on the path to an anarchist society.

Like it or not, if you listen to rock music, 90% of the influences in contemporary rock come from bands and groups with solid foundations in anarchism. such as the Dead Kennedys, Sex Pistols, and Napalm Death. There are a lot more but I'm sure you get the point.

Trendy ass-hats misuse the anarchist label to describe themselves because they falsely believe this justifies being mean or violent to everyone they come across and of course, it sounds "cool". I was stalked on this forum for 3 months and even had a wiki page dedicated to slandering me by such a trendy ass-hat. The aggressor did so because I took my time before deciding to actually support Occupy, so by attempting pressure me into his way of thinking, he was proving that he did not understand the base concept of anarchy, Chaos. Chaos is the foundation for classic anarchy, while the popular misuse of the term prevents me from even considering calling myself an anarchist, I am a firm believer in Chaos and if you have ever seen the butterfly on my website and didn't connect the dots, shame on you :D I give props to Jart and here friend that went on Faux News. It takes more than most of you have, to go on international television and stand up for such an abused and misunderstood way of thinking.

65 Comments

65 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

The right throws words out there and the left bites. We are absurd.

[-] 2 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

There has to be some form of authority in a society as large as mankind. How would we have running water, electricity, streets to drive on, peaceful neighborhoods. And we also need human rights so authority can not over step it's bounds. But the authority I refer to is approved authority by all. It is an elected, or appointed authority. Someone capable of finalizing decisions. Civilization would not exist without authority. Not now, not ever.

There are many labels out there of different ideas and ways of thinking. The best advise I can give," we must all be reasonable." to stand rigid on an ideal may have merit when the ideal posesses a peaceful solution. But an open mind is always able to grow with new ideals brought forth.

There has never been a perfect ideal, or method of civilization, but we do have the freedom to explore and discuss all possibilities. Let's not reject that freedom. It's our futures best hope.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

There is a form of anarchist democracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy In fact, I do believe the GAs are based on this form of democracy. I should have mentioned that in the OP.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago
  • It takes more than most of you have, to go on international television and stand up for such an abused and misunderstood way of thinking.*

Can we change that to "it was an incredible act of courage for one to stand up for their beliefs and their ideology on a national forum that harbors a great deal of animosity towards them".

Lets not belittle or assume negatives about the rank and file here. The fact that they are here in a minority representing publicly the 99% says a lot.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Don't get me wrong, it's not like we're likely to reach anyone who watches watch Fox on a regular basis anyway, but video's like this do have a tendency to go viral. I agree, it did take courage to go on Hannity, but hopefully we learned our lesson. Fox News, bad idea :)

[-] -2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

No, I will not. None of you have the courage to use your real name or show your faces. What I stated was a fact. I make exception for street level protesters but most of the people remaining on this forum are not street level protesters. No, I will not give you credit that you have not earned.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

What is it with you people and assumptions.... I don't get it, really.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/01/nyregion/at-brookhaven-a-new-charge-that-radiation-threatens-water.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Bob Ramirez, me. In 1998 I worked for the DoE at Brookhaven National Laboratory. The DoE had been covering up that radionuclides had entered the groundwater and was impacting local neighborhoods. As the Project Manager for the Sitewide Characterization Project (10,000 acre responsibility) I had the records to implicate DoE.

After taking the info to the NYS AG's Office, with no response, I took it to the NYT, which ran the above story. I then had a press conference where I was interviewed by ABC, CBS, CNN, various radio shows, Newsday, and minor local papers.... defending my stance publicly against the DoE.

I was blacklisted from the environmental remediation community and couldn't get work, my family was threatened with death in phone calls at 3 am for weeks.

Do I pass the test?

[-] 2 points by infonomics (393) 2 years ago

Your courage is admirable and appreciated, especially considering your vulnerability (family). I wish the best for you and your family.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

It's been years since I did this, but one can never be too careful. I have no ambitions to be a martyr, nor have anyone innocent hurt by my own actions. Thank you very much for your kind words and concern.

[-] -1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Why, because you got cut and you backed away? I spent 2 years working on a software platform that is now very unlikely to ever sell because I don't have a squeaky clean online rep. This is the price we pay. Integrity takes commitment. See my reply to hchc bellow.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Backed away from what?

[-] -1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Is geo your real name?

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

It's my standard internet username. Makes things easy. My real name is Bob Ramirez, as per the article I linked.

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Mr Ramirez, if you consider in realistic terms why you use a handle, you will find ultimately it boils down to limiting the level of consequence should you use your real name. It is up to the individual whether or not they want to risk facing those consequences but avoiding the potential consequences also means you avoid the potential credibility and respect that comes with it.

[-] 2 points by RoughKarma (122) 2 years ago

Actually I use a handle cause everyone else (except you) does. I think it is kind a given that people use screen names anymore. If you had used one you wouldn't have been cyber-stalked, maybe? A delicately fine line between brave and stupid.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Indeed. That is the conundrum isn't it. The individual must make that decision for themselves. I don't think doing it because everyone else does it makes a good argument for this particular topic though.

[-] 1 points by RoughKarma (122) 2 years ago

I guess what I meant was if everyone was using their real name I would be okay with that, too. You seem to think it a point of pride that you use your real name. That's cool. You also seem to think using it gives you credibility. I think that's a self-delusion. Also fine by me, but I think credibility comes from the cogency of the thought or comment and not by it's attributability. The quality of the thought determines the quality of the person and not the other way around. Beyond that, the name is just a name. "richardkentgates" isn't more real or informative for me than "geo" or "DKAtoday." After all, Mark Twain wasn't Mark Twain.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Using my name is for my own integrity yes,"pride" ok sure. My overarching point, hiding your identity makes you look afraid and you cannot expect the government or anyone else to take your opinions or right to grievances seriously if you're too scared to even stand behind those grievances and opinions. You look afraid. You look scared. Let them know you aren't, thats the point.

[-] 3 points by RoughKarma (122) 2 years ago

No, this is my normal look. Maybe it's the lighting. I'm just having a conversation. If I want to be taken seriously about my grievances, I wouldn't use a forum like this. This is just mental masturbation. It makes me feel good, I can have my fantasies, but I don't expect much to come from it. I hear the opinions of others and give my own. It's a little like having a conversation in a bar. The anonymity of the internet loosens the inhibitions the same way a couple of beers will. You have the same types of people. A couple of people are having a decent conversation. There's always the guy who's acting like it's his first beer, talking way too loud and with little sense. There's the old guy who's bitter and wants you to accept his opinion because he's older and wiser. A woman or two that try to keep the peace by being all sunshine and lollipops. A couple of guys that let it get out of hand and start a fight (I wish they'd take it outside cause it makes it hard to hear the conversation.) I just come for the beer and the darts. I have a couple, throw some darts and then go home, always wishing there was a metaphor for the cute little blonde who's looking for some fun. When you want to effect real political change, don't try to do it in a bar. Cheers!

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Because I'm a very introspective individual, I love that metaphor. lololol, it makes me think and rings so very true. Nice one!

[-] 2 points by RoughKarma (122) 2 years ago

Thanks

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

For this all being so pointless, you spent a lot of text explaining it. I don't do hipster poetry. Cheers indeed.

[-] 1 points by RoughKarma (122) 2 years ago

So you're the bitter old guy. Cool. I didn't say it was pointless. Masturbation, even of the mental kind has a point. But you are seriously slamming people for having screen names and making yourself out the hero because you don't. It's just a conversation. Tilt at the windmills all you want, but stop making it seem like I'm the crazy one.

[-] 1 points by markpaddles (143) from Denver, CO 2 years ago

Oh my god... I love this comment! Of the nearly 6 years that I have been following and reading various internet forums...This is one of the best comments that I have read about commenting on internet forums! Do you mind if I borrow from it?

[-] 1 points by RoughKarma (122) 2 years ago

Sure, hey, who's gonna know?

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Mr. Gates...

I have a family. They should not suffer the consequences of the decisions I made. If I thus lose your credibility and respect, so be it. I'm really not here to live up to your expectations, nor do I think with your post do you currently live up to mine. You haven't been in my shoes, nor I in yours... so I will leave it at that.

If you think two tv interviews by Harrison Schultz makes him a hero beyond reproach.... thats your business. Don't push that on me.... or belittle others for it.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

What favors are you doing if you cannot raise your children to believe in integrity and honesty? How is it you think our society got to such a low point? The oppression of ideas that we see in other countries happens everywhere. In the united states, the only difference is that social pressure has been used rather than force. The effect has been the same. People in Iran speak under fake names and anonymity, now so do you.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

I did a great favor for my kids as they watched their father take the fight to enemy. They saw me stand up against a withering attack by the government and its supporters. They were there at the press conferences, they were there for the 3am death threats. They saw it all.

At the same time they have a right to make their own decisions that they will be responsible for.... and will have to think about their families as well.

If you are looking for martyrs.... I am not one. But I sure do know how to wage a war.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

I respect your actions. I'm just making my position clear.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

BTW, I won that fight. 6 months later the DoE met with me privately and gave in to my demands for cleanup.

I still think your position leaves much to be desired. Martyrs serve little purpose but to be crucified.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Yo will never know, because your success was made with your credibility on the line.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

That wasn't the only time in my life that I have been active. I've been around the block a few times.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

Here is my name good luck finding me

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

lol, why would I want to find you? You assume a level of importance that doesn't exist. If that is indeed your real name, props to ya homie. It's a lot harder for the system to ignore real people than it is for them to ignore fictional characters.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

richardkentgates

Is you have'n a bad day?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

lol, why? I'm speaking on something I feel strongly about so their must be something wrong with me? Is this not an attempt to push me into the same dark corner of anonymity that I have been speaking about? No, I'm having a pretty relaxed day. How about you?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I feel that you have taken some kind of personal injury as your current round of comments sounds rather hurtful in a reactionary sort of way.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

By the way, it's funny to see you attempting to apply the same social pressures to myself, trying to get me to back down, that is applied throughout our society that results in the perceived need for anonymity when speaking about ones' beliefs.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I have to wonder about your perception. As you brow beat individuals if they do not support your thinking 100%. Do you think that that is winning hearts and minds (?) or just maybe driving people away?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

I know, it would make you more comfortable if I was docile and played by some sort of unspoken social politics, but that is counter to my beliefs. It seems to me you are not understanding the concept in general.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

See it seems to me and apparently to quite a few others - that it is your way or the highway. That only you know how to do anything correctly. Sorry but you come off as being very condescending and very intolerant of people who are confronting greed corruption and crime because they are not doing it as you would have them.

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Again, you are equating the values of other to my beliefs in an attempt to guilt me into suppression. There are other social pressures used to achieve such means, peer pressure, potential backlash form authority, ect... They all have the same intent to use social pressure to either force self-censoring or to make a black-sheep of the person in question.

If at any time this conversation makes you uncomfortable, feel free to eject yourself from it. Otherwise, debate means offering your own opinion, not attempting to discredit myself, thats a cowards way of dealing with disagreement.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Who is discrediting? You may be seen in that light today in your recent comments to others. I am merely pointing out the facts of your recent comments. As well as past history of intolerance to those who do not pick-up and support your thoughts.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

None of your posts on this thread attempt to deal with the topic at hand. You persist in trying to invalidate myself and my position through coercion instead of reason. Keep reorganizing the same strategy but it is still the same creature, regardless of color.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You are your own worst enemy. And what we have been talking about ( you & I ) is very Germain to this post. You are alienating.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

if I were alienating, there would not be 41 replies on this thread in less than 2 hours. The word you are looking for is "Provacative". I didn't actually start this topic, my post was about anarchy and this is the direction it took all on it's own including your replies, derived for the perception of one sentence in the original post. Chaos in action.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

If you look at those 41 replies it is a basic response in the same general vein. What are you talking about? ( that is the general vein not a question )

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

there is no reason im just a college kid studying to be good Mechanical Engineering i have no importance now

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

Well, by the time you get there, your ability to say what you stood for will bring you nothing but respect.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

i like that a lot thank you for saying that

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Jeremy Griffin....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6e5qRUCI1I

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

:D man I like your style. I appreciate you putting your name out there. Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling anyone a coward. I'm just saying it takes that extra something to place your name and cred on the line for what you believe. While many people supporting Occupy have done some really great things, I hold an exceptional respect for others who decide to show they are not afraid to stand behind what they believe by risking their own credibility. Most of these online supporters will eventually fade sooner or later and resume their lives with no consequence for what they say and the beliefs they support. I feel those people place less importance on the right and wrong of their interactions and beliefs because they know, ultimately they can just walk away from it. For me, it's an issue of integrity, something desperately lacking not only in our politicians, but in ourselves.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I like to play a little game called "Put Yo Name on It" :)

Very few ever want to play....

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

LMAO, you nailed it.

[-] 1 points by DouglasAdams (208) 2 years ago

Is anarchy an option? The political controversy today is over the economy, healthcare, taxes, jobs and national debt. The national debt is center stage because Republicans want to cut spending to balance the budget and spare future generation’s unsustainable taxation.

The new Republican Romney and Ryan duo have not yet mentioned anything about what they will do about fraud, deregulation, incompetence and corruption that has affected financial sector for over 40 years. They are blaming Obama for the unethical behavior at banks that led to the financial crisis under Bush and is continuing. Why aren't there audits of every agency in the federal, state, county and municipal government? Is the government too small?

The Congress approved Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, Medicare Drug Acts without raising taxes. This launched the United States on a spending spree that will be billed later. Wall St had provided credit for US expenditures, but Congress should have locked the doors to the Wall St casino when $2.3 trillion disappeared from the Pentagon in one year, 2001.

That Pentagon’s accounting failure is such a huge amount of money that it should have shut the government down immediately. How could our governments have been so easily distracted by jets flying into the WTC Twin Towers? Do you realize how much money $2.3 trillion is? If $700 billion TARP was needed to float the banking system in 2008. What would $2.3 trillion do if it is missing? Where could it have gone?

Let’s suppose the endemic government fraud, deregulation, incompetence and corruption are signals that anarchy has already taken over. That explains a lot. Except it is from the top down, not the bottom up. The 1% are among the anarchists and vice versa.

Max Keiser on Currency Wars Global Derivatives http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSadYgsJ2rQ

Max Keiser on Too Big to Fail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiaax9GHFL0&list=PL57A38F2F2E292781&feature=view_all

Rumsfeld Announces $2.3 Trillion Missing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJOkdZTHP7Q

[-] 1 points by nichole (525) 2 years ago

Most people don't deal well without structure.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22162) 2 years ago

Good post, Richard.

[-] 1 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 2 years ago

The only peaceful anarchy is one where all know everything of needs. Never placing their wants over anothers need.

Think of a society that created the "potlatch" and why the event was made illegal, punishable with death, by a colonizing force.

Where a mans material power was determined by how much he gave away.

[-] 0 points by kaiserw (211) 2 years ago

I am very fond of the real anarchistic ideas. Doug Casey is a peaceful advocate for anarchy. The only issue that troubles me is that there would not be a 3rd party group to enforce contracts, and very basic rule of law.

The danger is you could end up in a race condition of groups competing for power like we saw post soviet collapse, or in Bosnia etc. Often times, the people who end up rising to the top are the most violent,brutal and oppressive. That's my only concern.

So how do we enforce rule of law and contracts (community social pressure? will it work?) then also how do we prevent tyrants and gangs from amassing power? I have ideas, and I think it probably would be akin to the swiss military model, or the original American model, every citizen a soldier type thing.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

I’ve posted on this a couple of times already, but I’ll say it again. In the public’s mind anarchist = terrorist. Whether you or I agree makes no difference. The masses will not support violence, regardless of the reason.

I doubt you’ll convince the masses that anarchism, chaos, bedlam and lawlessness is a good thing. They see potential terrorists. Frankly I fail to see what anarchists expect to accomplish. Why would you want to inflame the very people you profess to support?

As it pertains to OWS, they are better off denying the anarchist mentality. It’s simply a matter of maintaining credibility with the public.

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 2 years ago

I'm sorry but your post tells me you only read part of my post or simply don't understand it. I suggest using the links provided and doing your own research.

[-] -1 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

To be fair, I re-read your post more slowly and paid more attention to see if I missed something. I didn’t find anything I missed. So I guess it’s possible I don’t understand what you’re saying.

I concede a lot of anarchists are non-violent. But there is a probability that some are (five guys in Ohio). And those few concern me and most other folks. At this point the public doesn’t understand the difference, and probably don’t care.

All I’m saying is anarchism is counterproductive for OWS.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2244) 2 years ago

If only our Military occupying Afghanistan could understand that.

[-] -1 points by cherokeechief (-26) 2 years ago

One good thing about anarchy is that it would get us to the sustainable 500 million total earth population we must have very quickly!