Paedantic Basterd

That is a much more acceptable definition, but being a misanthrope, I just can't see it as possible.

cardboard adolescent

Which seems to entail an assumption about human nature, which I would like you to make explicit and defend.

Dirty

The idea you talked about sounds nice... Everything being freely available, people sharing/caring, but I don't think it's realistic whatsoever and I don't think things would play out like that

I think too many people would take advantage of anarchy, which would cause a chain reaction of negatives. Because if some lazy bum is using all these things that other people worked hard on, and they aren't contributing anything to society, it causes a problem. The people doing all the hard work don't get much benefit, and i think a lot of people would be drawn to being the lazy bum who doesn't do much but still uses the products made by others people.

Anarchy in general just sounds like a terrible idea

cardboard adolescent

I don't really believe there is such a thing as a "lazy bum." All you have to do is notice how active people are, how dead-set they are on doing something, even when they're doing nothing. Just look at how difficult it is for us to meditate--even if we can get our bodies to hold still, our minds continue to race. The reason that people are drawn to being lazy bums is because they think that's the ultimate, to just be able to sit around eating and drinking and napping. The reason people believe that's the ultimate is because that is the ultimate alternative to working, and the reason people don't like working is because it's competitive and stressful. Not because working requires physical exertion--just look at how many people do yoga or play sports without really needing to. Not because working makes you think--just look at us, having a thoughtful conversation when we could be sitting around doing nothing. The issue is that we have this distinction between work and play, that play is good and work is bad. And I think this fundamentally stems from the fact that work is competitive, rather than the natural self-expression which we believe it is as children.

So the other argument becomes, well, everyone would want to have certain jobs, and nobody would want to do crappy jobs. Again, I think the distinction between cool jobs and crappy jobs stems from the fact that work is competitive, that there are different ranks of pay, and hence different levels of social esteem. If all work was done for its own sake, and for the sake of sharing it, there wouldn't be any difference between a cool job and a crappy job. There wouldn't be a difference between a useful job and a useless job, every job would be useful in its own way. You wouldn't have everyone becoming a rebellious artist because there would be nothing to rebel against, and there wouldn't be a distinction between making art or making a product, since the function of all work would be the same--to share with others.

Oh, and even with the lazy bum scenario, ultimately those doing the hard work do get the benefit. Which is simply being able to share their hard work with others. That's the fundamental paradigm shift that has to take place, and it's really not as hard as you think. Put it into practice in your own life, that's always a good first step.

P A N

i like your thoughts cardboard. but really, this all sounds much more like socialism or communism than anarchy.

to me it just seems as though anarchy is a starting point. it's like the spot when the mob realizes they can stop rapists. then they evolve and it becomes a system.

Paedantic Basterd

Thank you for this disclaimer, but I'm not feeling up to such a debate.

Dirty

cardboard, I think most people do feel good about themselves for creating something and being productive... but in the ideas you present, who would want to do these boring jobs? Who would want to be a custodian or trash man? Surely they wouldn't do it because it's their passion. Part of the reason people may not like work is what you said -competition and stress - but to most people, work isn't fun. The job itself isn't enjoyable and that's why they wouldn't do it if they didn't have to. I think your thoughts are just overly optimistic. I think a lot of people would be lazy and be content with sitting around, partying or whatever, and taking advantage of everyone elses creation. Even if it was just a small amount, the people actually doing the work would get pissed and feel ungrateful for these bums. I don't think having everything just free and available to everyone is a great idea.

jastrub

Most anarchists believe in direct retaliation. In an anarchist society, coalitions would exist to protect the members. However, they would be voluntary and very, very small. If somebody assaults you in an anarchist society, you have the right to assault them back in self defense.

SATCHMO

Are we talking anarchists as in extreme socialism, radical left wing ideology, decentralization of government, et al., or is this just the, "I need something to further accessorise my attire besides a bullet belt and safety pins." type of anarchy?

Queen Boo

I don't think most animals are smart enough to be psycopaths.

__________________
https://www.twitch.tv/drrobuttnik