How is anarchism even a thing. How is it supposed to make sense at all?
>>614819
it's just edgelords
also cute dog
nice dog
I'm not sure there is a consensus on what proper anarchy is beyond the absence of the state.
>>614833
But how did anyone ever think that it was a decent idea? It's so obviously retarded yet it somehow exists, like intellectual cancer
>>614829
>>614831
:3
>>614819
the idea is that everything will just magically work out for the best.
Or a slightly better thought out answer i heard once was that everyone's personal self interest would result in the promotion of common good without nay authority needing to Shepard the people.
This of course does not work.
Also lets try to come up with a moral justification for dogs.
in an idealistic world it would work its just creating the idealistic world thats a problem here
>>614888
>everyone's self interest would create a common good
So it's basically rousseau for dummies?
Also I have like 800 doggo pics, I love them so much
It's what we already have.
In the beginning of the development of mankind, there was anarchy. That anarchy led to this.
It's a catchall phrase that's more often than not co-opted by communists and vague socialists.
>>614819
Punk
Anarchism is the ultimate contrarian middle finger to everyone in terms of ideology.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLRgdKV0lmE
no goverments
people are free to do as they wish
it's either utopian or chaotic which are both kinda cool.and in a lot of ways better than the society we have today
>>614819
They presuppose the innate goodness of human nature.
Anyone with even a minor degree of historical awareness knows exactly how stupid an assumption that is. Hobbes was right.
>>614967
>I would rather be in Somalia than sit in my warm room jerking off to anime and eating ice cream.
>>614819
>They presuppose the innate goodness of human nature.
This.
It would work if all people were friends which each other and had good will and were charitable etc..
The problem is people aren't like that.
That's why anarchism is retarded.
Anarchism doesn't survive "rebellions".
>>615010
I though that was pretty funny and googled it. SO many blog posts along the lines of "X reasons why these comics aren't funny" and they're all, ironically enough, complaining about the tiniest implications of 'fat-shaming'. I mean 4chan complains about SJW's a lot bu my god do they have no self awareness?
People are only anarchists so they can wipe the slate clean in order to setup their own government afterwards.
Basically anarchism states that, humans are pretty good at living their lives without central organization.
>>615084
"One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship." - Orwell
Name all anarchist writers you know. Most of them will be slav.
There's very good reason for it. And it's also a reason why people influenced by German lifestyle, customs and philosophy(Kant is special in this regard) will have troubles understanding it.
>>615096
Orwell sympathised with revolutionary left most of the time, he just hated stalinists.
>>614819
>this state isn't working for me
>therefore all states work for nobody
it's people projecting their own selfishness from the bottom up
>>615094
It's not even so much a lack of organization necessarily, because anarchism theory usually devotes a lot of time to explaining methods by which the people might organize themselves. The difference is that these organizing forces are non-governmental and are not founded on the use of coercive force.
Basically the idea is that the state represents one facet of an inherently oppressive system that exploits the labor of and stifles the progress of the working class. Most of the functions that the state holds can be done more effectively and in a manner more representative of the people's will when actually managed by the people themselves.
>>615094
>bodies are pretty good at functioning without a central nervous system
maybe as single celled organisms
Pirated media, video game mods (some of which are better than any game in the market), and free to download software are examples of anarchy in the digital world.
Anarchism can be good at meeting the peoples needs.
Capitalism can be good at generating capital.
It's up to you to decide which you want.
>in b4 on a ( ) made from capitalism.
Anarchist schools are not against the idea of using existing infrastructure to meet their goals.
>>616028
So stealing shit?
Edgy
>>614967
>and in a lot of ways better than the society we have today
You tell me how a complete breakdown of law and order is better than the society we have today.
Guess what? Without a society based on law you've got a society based on what Bubba wants to do with your sweet ass and all your belongings.
And if you really think that you'll come out on top in a world like that, that's adorable.
>>614888
the dog is man kinds oldest ally
also very cuddly
>>616074
maybe the dog is actually holding back mankind like a crutch we don't need anymore? Maybe dogs are harmful to the common good now?
>>614910
It's the same thing that puzzles me about people concerned with social mobility and meritocracy.
Perhaps all they want is just a momentary reset? You know, since the original state is seen as desirable it makes sense trying trying to revert everything back to it, even if it's only for a short while. Maybe a full on anarchist revolution every once in a while is seen as necessary for them? You know, to keep things as close to desirable as possible and to avoid any potential changes which may make it impossible to "restart" things again.
>>614819
Haven't you ever dreamed of putting on masks, taking a car and just riding through the downtown during midnight and crashing in all the symbols of whatever class oppression you can imagine (ie whatever building is high and has lots of glass)? A couple of molotovs here, graffiti there. Maybe put some anarchist posters onto public places. Kick some shit in with a bat. Maybe even throw a bomb into some richfags windows or plant it on his car. Just incite chaos. Never, really?
>>616038
Gotta break a few eggs if you wanna make an omelet.
But creating things that everyone can enjoy will lead to people using them for the benefit of society.
>>616140
>Never, really?
No? I know it sounds childish, but the golden rule is common across cultures for a reason.
>>616140
>Haven't you ever dreamed of putting on masks, taking a car and just riding through the downtown during midnight and crashing in all the symbols of whatever class oppression you can imagine (ie whatever building is high and has lots of glass)? A couple of molotovs here, graffiti there. Maybe put some anarchist posters onto public places. Kick some shit in with a bat. Maybe even throw a bomb into some richfags windows or plant it on his car. Just incite chaos. Never, really?
yeah but there needs to be richfags to rob
>>616168
Isn't it funny we have all these philosophies and religions allover the world calling people to act morally and not a single ideology that would incite immoral behavior, yet immorality is omnipresent?
Doesn't that imply we're naturally inclined towards the 'bad'?
>>616188
>yeah but there needs to be richfags to rob
You don't rob them. That's the point. You kill them and set fire to their possessions. Fuck everything. Anarchy.
>>616198
>Doesn't that imply we're naturally inclined towards the 'bad'?
I dunno man, but even if we are, we gotta rise above our baser instincts and use empathy+logic.
How would you like it if somebody started smashing your shit just because you have more money than them?
>>616198
>You don't rob them. That's the point. You kill them and set fire to their possessions. Fuck everything. Anarchy.
there needs to be a something to kill and burn and fuck.
>>616219
>I dunno man, but even if we are, we gotta rise above our baser instincts and use empathy+logic.
It was a rhetorical question.
>How would you like it if somebody started smashing your shit just because you have more money than them?
I wouldn't. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy being in the position of the aggressor. In fact this does in no way logically deter me. If I am the rich guy I'll do anything I can to keep my shit being pushed in. If I am the poor fuck I'll do anything I can to tip the scales on my side. This is called being rational.
You'll find lots of situations that have multiple parties involved will have one screwing the other while knowing how well it must suck cock to be on the other side of the stick.
>>616240
There's always something unless you're the top dog of the town.
>>616275
>You'll find lots of situations that have multiple parties involved will have one screwing the other while knowing how well it must suck cock to be on the other side of the stick
If your friends are jumping off a bridge, would you join them? Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it right.
>>616112
Then we must advance dog. We crafted dog over generations, we can refine dog for a new age.
>>616112
I won't a hear a fucking word of it.
>>616285
>Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it right.
Now that's just a horrible attempt from you. That didn't even come close to representing what I said.
>>616198
>You don't rob them. That's the point. You kill them and set fire to their possessions. Fuck everything. Anarchy.
>Implying rich people won't just pay people like me to shoot pathetic anarchists when they try to feebly storm the gates, all while we laugh and laugh at your cries of agony
>>616311
>implying if I got my mates together and crushed through the gates into a richfags villa he'd have anyone there to defend them
>implying we wouldn't get to do 20 wonders on them before anyone arrived
>>616325
Then go ahead faggot, what's stopping you from doing it if you think there'd be no consequences?
Oh, right, the police would haul you off and beat you within an inch of your life and you'd spend the rest of your life in the rape cage you deserve.
>>616335
But I never said I'd actually do it. I just said it's a fun thing to imagine.
You know if I had access to weapons and had willing people I might even put these imaginations to fruition...
In any case it's nothing I'd actively work towards.
>>614819
I know that bulge
>>616348
>I just said it's a fun thing to imagine.
>It's fun to imagine inflicting harm upon people due to their class
WHEWW LAD
I hope the NSA is watching this madman. If he tries to board a plane with all this edge, he could cause another 9/11
>>616362
>i have never not once imagined one day just fucking everything up without a concern for consequences, just disregarding every and any restriction be it moral, legal or personal and just letting loose this ancient primal violent beast residing inside
This is 4chan, where people stop pretending shit.
Except pedos.
>>614829
Ya like dags?
You can arrive at anarchism theoretically a number of ways:
When the state becomes so oppressive the alternative of anarchy seems to become tenable.
The philosophical anarchist position:
States typically do not have the legitimate political authority to compel a duty to obey on its citizens. It's technically possible but the criteria are strenuous. I can't remember them, but you can check out A. John Simmons's works. I read his 'Justification and Legitimacy' article.
Then there are anarchist communes where the small enough scale makes accountability to each other (reputation easily disseminates) much more possible. Lots of group pressure to conform though, depending on how much there really is an alleged lack of hierarchy. Though that's not going to work for individualist anarchists who simply don't want to be told what to do, feel like they should be the complete rulers of their own lives etc.
