anthropicprincipal:

oktavia-von-gwwcendorff:

ilzolende:

lone-wiz:

ilzolende:

lone-wiz:

ilzolende:

lone-wiz:

mitoticcephalopod:

lone-wiz:

mitoticcephalopod:

lone-wiz:

the-blunt-fucking-truth:

infoshopvanguardist:

Shoutout to Minneapolis anarchists for the best banner yet

Cucks.

Best banner yet?  Hardly.  What exactly does it communicate?  Absolutely nothing.  Unless you already know what they’re about, you’re left going no to what?  Fail!

But, frankly, this is your brain on anarchy – especially if you are actually stupid enough to think it’s possible.  It’s not.  Governments can be overthrown but anarchy will never exist because the weak will always band together to protect themselves from the strong by making and enforcing rules as a group and that, my friends, is government!  Anarchy is literally impossible.

>current year
>insulting something by saying it’s a “fail!”

Dude, if you’re going to argue with me, have the balls to do it openly instead of thinking that I can’t reblog your arguments if you hide them in the tags.  I’m only gonna screenshot that shit and do it this way.  lmao

I meant to be insulting calling the absolute fail the fail it is.  Was that not in fashion this current year?  Who gives a fuck?

As for if anarchy is possible or not, anarchy is nothing more than the absence of government, any government, not necessarially the one in place.  What do you think is going to happen in anarchy?  We’re all going to sit around the campfire singing kumbaya?  lmao  

No, killers will kill more since there’s no one to stop them.  Rapists will just rape whoever they please without fear of consequence.  Thieves will just take whatever the hell they want and so on.  No rules, people doing whatever the hell they want which will wind up in the physically strong preying on the physically weak.  

Wait you say (I can almost hear you doing so) the killer has to worry about the victim’s family killing them in turn; the rapist has to worry about the victim and those who care about her exacting revenge since there is no law to stop them, the victim of theft will gather his friends to help him take back his possessions by force.

Exactly.

Do you really think that the weak are just going to take being bullied by the strong lying down or do what they’ve always done and band together for protection and, as a group, make up rules limiting behavior and how we treat one another and using the power of the group to enforce those rules aka laws.  That, my friend, is government.  You overlook that government is born out of anarchy to begin with.  lmao

If you actually think it through, anarachy is literally impossible.  If you come back with no in anarchy thus and thus will be enforced than all you’re doing is describing government, just not the current government.  If anything at all is enforced, it is not anarchy:

dude, I…

I literally have no words for how dumb this argument is.

I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I’m not here to educate you. if you want to be able to argue against anarchists, actually learn what we believe, don’t argue against some made up strawman that only exists in your head.

Uh uh.  Just what I thought.  You believe that it’s actually possible to be ungoverned.  I notice you weren’t able to refute my logic.  Sadly, humans being all too human, government is a necessary evil.

Most of the anarchists I know want polycentric law and like some eras of Iceland and many features of Somalia.

Law is government.  Any law.  Anarchy is the abssence of government.  So basically this is more newspeak.  You want to change the form of government but call it anarachy.  Is that anything like the fascist antifa?  

A rose by any other name is still a rose.

What you suggest is not anarchy.  It is merely replacing one government with another.

And Somalia!?  Really?  That hellhole you want to be like?  You’re just confirming anarchists are crazy.

Yeah, “anarchy” is a weird name for things which in many ways consist of pointing at large and difficult-to-avoid-dealing-with states and saying “argh, not that”.

But while fiction like The Ungoverned may feature government-like entities, it would be difficult to call the region described a country in the sense of the term, and given the overlapping juristictions it would be difficult to draw borders for it.

And this post is relevant to Somalia, which is far less of a hellhole than it could be.

David D Friedman has a lot of relevant statements, I think.

I’m not actually an anarchist or anything, I’m not confident enough in it to wholeheartedly endorse it. I just have some sympathies.

It doesn’t have to have countries or borders to be government; it merely has to enforce laws.  If this is what the anarchy movement is about, it should be honest and give itself some other name as it doesn’t actually want anarchy but a different form of government.

Somalia is such a horrible example.  It really is.  Ooh, it’s less of a hellhole than the hellhole it was is really not impressive.  Would you want to trade living in any Western nation for living in Somalia?  I doubt it but if so go on, migrate.  I won’t envy you, though.

Yeah, the word usage really isn’t that great. On the other hand, it’s hard to get people to change their names. Also, there are lots of different kinds of anarchists and most of them disagree with each other, and a lot of them also oppose capitalism, so it’s really not one coherent movement.

Fair point wrt Somalia.

Somalia is a hellhole because it’s an East African hellhole, and empirically an East African Hellhole has done better under East African Hellhole Statelessness than under East African Hellhole Government. The question is not about whether someone western would prefer Somalia to $west, but whether someone from eg. Eritrea would prefer Somalia instead.

You cannot have the government of Iceland in Somalia in anything resembling the near future, so comparing Somalia to Iceland is disingenuous; with a similar argument one could say that because a billionaire playboy who has inherited their wealth wouldn’t want to trade their position for that of a honest hard-working undocumented immigrant, it implies that working hard and smart is worthless and everyone could just as well slack off like that billionaire.

Ethiopia is about as far from an anarchist utopia as you can get, and there is net migration from Somalia to Ethiopia. http://data.unhcr.org/horn-of-africa/regional.php

Greater Somalia, yes. The Republic of Somaliland, not so (as far as I can find out) which is the one that matters.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s