It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is anarchism the solution?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Both political parties have been exposed to be total frauds and they don't really represent anything that we all thought they were. Democrats have not seemed to back down on their big-government views even when it comes to cases like National Security. When it comes to the National Security state the Democrats have flip-flopped and have taken the same views as Republicans when it comes to wiretapping, covert operations, assassination programs, and using bomb threats. Democrats have also flip-flopped on their views in corporations.

While many Democrats have poised themselves to be anti-corporations it is clear that from the legislation that they've passed that they've only wanted reform, but only reform for the corporations so they'll have more stuff, while passing a phony consumer protection bill that is more of a power-grab for the federal government. There was a time when they were their anti-corporate self, when the Supreme Court made that ruling regarding corporations, but now things are back to normal.

We can't really trust most libertarians either. Libertarians have made an alliance with the Republican party and they still seem to think that the Tea-Party stands for limited government. There are those that know the truth and speak it freely, but those are the more radical ones. And as we know the Republican party is still the same as ever, with Jim Boehner being the corporate-politician and not hiding it. What has happened to our country when a politician is in bed with lobbyists? People elect him to be the house speaker of course.

There hasn't been a real investigation about the causes of 9-11 yet and how it happened. I am not a 9-11 truther but I believe there was more to it than just Al-Qaeda. 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Maybe it even had Saudi financing? Our government refuses to acknowledge this possibility because we're in bed with Saudi Arabia and both parties seem intent on kissing up to their king and not getting us off on oil. Presidents will talk but they don't encourage private investors enough.

Is anarchism the way forward? I'm starting to really get tired of this false-dichotomy, and false two-party system without real representation. We have a voice, and we can vote people in office, but once they're elected they forget the voice of the people that elected them. And the government doesn't ever seem to get smaller no matter even if "limited-government Republicans" get elected.

Is anarchism the solution? I'd say it might be a solution, or at least a temporary solution in order for society to get itself back on its feet and kick out the elites that have been lying to them and have been treating them like dogs. I say we should try anarchism for a while and then remake our system, or until as long as it takes to really just restore the balance back to the people. We can set up organizations for various government agencies like the military and make them private corporations at the mean time and make them accountable to individuals. They can still do things in an anarchical society but until we bring back saneness into our society, we need them to be de-legitimized from their authority position at least in the meantime.

And no, I'm not saying that we should be a society of complete disorder. The various government forces would still be there, and the police would still be there. They just wouldn't have their authority as the head of the state like they've had before and they would have to compete with other people to regain their legitimacy.

I'm all for temporary anarchism. I believe that the state in modern societies has been more or less a parasite on its people. It claims to represent the will of the people while it ignores it and supports the plutocratic elite. It may at times support the people, but they've been proving to us more and more that the people that they care about are the ones that are in business. They want these corrupt corporations to keep going and for only 4% of people to not be their slaves. It's time to end this facade. We can still have companies and corporations and stuff... but we just need to really reform their legal rights and powers through the legal systems.

What are your thoughts? I don't consider myself an anarchist, but I am contemplating that temporary anarchism might be a good thing, if it was done right.




posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   
What would you refere to as in anarchism ? Little kids robing the coniniance store ? That is not anarchism.
I would say it;s regarded to living free as an individual, Anarchism can have it's empire where all agree on it to live in some kind of order. It's will out of chaos. Who wants to be part of our empire the rest can go live in the forests on the hills free, and the empire never go's to the hills. It just stays there.

The problem with this empire is that it's created on suffering with tricks behind closed doors, with lies.
Can you imagine how much killing and suffering was craved to get here. It's insanity and there is no where to go, because everything is this big empire. Nothing is free, all is money and money is all.



posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Sounds so very similar to the Libertarian ideal..

Self reliance

Self responsibilty

If people, as a whole were more self reliant and took responsibility for their actions, the majority of the problems listed in the OP would disappear.

Although I know it is a dirty word on here generally, true Conservatism exemplifies exactly the positions you have laid out..

Semper



posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Sounds so very similar to the Libertarian ideal..

Self reliance

Self responsibilty

If people, as a whole were more self reliant and took responsibility for their actions, the majority of the problems listed in the OP would disappear.

Although I know it is a dirty word on here generally, true Conservatism exemplifies exactly the positions you have laid out..

Semper

You make it sound so easy, people are influenced by control.They make it so hard that you can;'t be that way. As a human you have a level that you can take, then you give in, you don't care. We are not robots, we will never be.



posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Everything I’ve heard about anarchism is that’s it’s a good way to bring down a country, but a terrible way to run one without it becoming susceptible to tyrants –other power grabbers (like in George Orwell's, Animal Farm where the pigs replaced the farmer as tyrant).

Instead I believe we need a “Charterist” movement; i.e. a list of shared-popular demands, and passive resistance as the main form of protest. Street protests don’t work (other than to put your name on a government database!). We need something where the leaders aren’t definable-singular enough to be corrupted, arrested, or assassinated.



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


That's what I believe too. In theory libertarianism and conservatism would be great. Everyone would take responsibility for themselves and their own actions. People would be able to make decisions for themselves and think for themselves. The problem with that is that many people in society today while they are capable of being as rational as the enlightened thinkers thought we could be, they just give up in acquiescence, and we need to really change the power-structure at least temporarily. I think going towards anarchism for about 50 years or so via a constitutional amendment would be enough time to bring about some change in what is going on. Our system is beyond repair and we need to really just kind of like go back to the beginning and press the reset button. We could have the option under this constitutional amendment to go back to anarchism whenever we wanted.


edit on 15-9-2010 by Frankidealist35 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Frankidealist35
 

Can you imagine what would happen if we got out of the box, running around the universe. We would infest everyone.
Go on conquest to other worlds and mingle with natural evolution, what god created. Usualy a flood comes along, or something of the sort, so I would not worry about it. It's not the begining it is the end. Look what happen here in history, exploration by blood, native americans wipped out, africa slavery, gene mix. Go hunting with uncle bob. experiments on monkeys and uncle bob is responsible and what do you know, god does not like it and is not in agreement. Where ever the explorer go's in becomes the conquer. The beast is just a stupid monkey.
You beasts.
obey. then a flood comes in and the "enterprise sinks"

When we will learn just to be explorers I wonder.
A trade agreement and friendship is just that why make it more.
It's the beauty of diversity, of nature how diverse it is, why turn everything the same I wonder.
Anarchy to the fullest is not the solution either, we need tec to become explorers work toughether, but not like this.





edit on 15-9-2010 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Governing one self and learning to be self sufficient is often a lifetime of experience unless your fortunate to have had it in your life at some point.

No matter the "climate" of the body politic how you govern yourself and what you know about legal fictions is a solution onto itself .. To yourself.

So in so far as a solution? Absolutely, but you have to realize this has to be a personal revolution. Not something you can push int he self help section of the bookstores. or at rally s. You can create personal communities (which might be a challenge for individualists) but in so far as these co ops go they have been around and continue to endure.

So seek. or create them for yourselves.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Frankidealist35
 


Anarchism is an approach, a philosophy, even a way of life, but not a "solution" beyond the personal level.







edit on 17-9-2010 by justadood because: for purposes of the Revolution



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Frankidealist35
 



Anarchism isnt some fab that 'we shoud try out for a while' while the system 'gets back on its feet.', like some sort of hot girl on girl action that was experiented with in college. The whole point of Anarchism is to orderly (or not) dissasemble the violent monopoly that is the state and stamp out its barberous intent from the realm of acceptable discourse permanently and forever, just as overt slavery has been obliterated as a moral or practical system by 99.9% of humanity over the course of the last couple hundred years. (unthinkable a few hundred years ago)

To suggest that we collectively free ourself from the coercive and evil violence that has plagued mankind for all of recorded history, then shake ourselves off and rebuild the very temple that enslaved our minds and bodies for so long is to misunderstand the basic moral reasoning that anarchism springs from. We do not propose that the slaves should be freed only to re-enslave them at a later date with upgraded shakles, and we do not suggest that we cure a man of his brain tumour only to reinject him with cancer virus at a later date. Respectfully, I think youre missing the point.

The point is to be free of violence! Or perhaps the point is to be free of overwhelming morally sanctioned violence. To carefully win the battle of ideas and reason and break free of the chains of ignorance, and then, when the heat dies down, to willfully reapply the chains of coersion and aggression would be absolute madness and anyone subjecting themselves to such abuse might just deserve the punishment they would surely receive.

Anarchism isnt just an ideology - its a philospophy, a mindset and a way of life. Any of those who reject violence and yearn to be free from it could never finally attain statelesness and then wish to return to it in any way, any more than a prisoner who escaped unjust inprisionment would return to his torture cell once a week, or ever.

Wont happen in our lifetimes, but once it does we will look back at these times and wonder how something so simple as non sanctioned aggression could be overlooked by so many decent people.

So ya, its the way, the only way if we are to survive, and its not gonna happen anytime soon. This does not make it an unworthy goal.



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Neo_Serf
 


I agree. The State needs to be removed. It is just a tool used by a small private cabal to opress and control the masses. Its not needed anymore. Not when we die in their wars,get,poisoned by their fluorine and work for a wage slave getting paid money that is valueless.


Anarchy(no tiers of influence or centralized power) like true communism has never existed on earth. Why? because the elite need to state to legitimize thier tyranny. If you remove the state you make things VERY difficult for the globalists and the banksters.

With no one to buy off or assasinate what will they do? Declare a war on us?



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
The thing that I cannot understand is why do people feel the need to be led?.

Why does someone need another he/she considers greater than him/herself?.

Anarchy is only considered to be a negative thing by those who crave control over others.

Anarchy is only bad when those in the world have become irresponsible and selfish,not considering the needs and feelings of others.

Ahhh,that's it.

A bit of anarchy would be good if we all didn't emulate the criminals who rule us.

But,how are we supposed to act?.

Same old thing.
edit on 14-11-2010 by chiponbothshoulders because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Frankidealist35
 
We are granted the option in the constitution to reset things.

But we as a people have been so corrupted by luxury,we fear responsibility.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by chiponbothshoulders
 


We need to change the average american's consumer mentality. We are not just a collection of products. We ask more than to be "stimulated" or "sedated" with sensationaganda,the media and monday night football.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
I agree. The State needs to be removed.

I think society is just too big to not have a state of some sort, the problem is it has long since ceased to serve the people, so it doesn't necessarily need to be removed but it certainly needs to be changed, and the only way that is going to happen is by us, the people, the World over, getting together and sending a clear message to the establishment. It's funny how people are so apposed to a "new World order" when that's just exactly what we need.



People have changed, generation after generation becomes wiser, but we continue to allow the same corrupt system to lead us. The internet has made the World a smaller place, and we all see how corrupt and broken the system is, so lets change it. Look at the student protests in London, that should be happening every day in every country but on a larger scale and about the way things are done, and that we want to see it changed.




top topics



 
4

log in

join