NationStates Jolt Archive

No war
Equality
Love
No hate

Really, can you honestly say that these utopian societies that some people envision are honestly achievable? And even so, realistically, can you say a society like so would even last under human conditions?

It will take a long time before there is no hatred in a society, without lobotomizing everyone.

It will take a long time before there is no hatred in a society, without lobotomizing everyone.

what's so wrong with that?? :D hehehe...i'll personally volunteer to perfom the operations if anyone can find us a nice patch of land to set up on.

I wish that a utopian society could be achieved...
But it's always know the closer we come togather the more differences we find between one another and that leads to more arguments...
The Human Race needs a common enemy to truly unite... Because we'd rather stick around with our fellow humans then the aliens...even if we don't see eye to eye about everything...

It's unfortunate... But take the world for example when it came to Hitler...

How good would a utopian society be? I mean, if everything was just so perfect, we'd lose contact with how precious freedom really is.. :)

what's so wrong with that?? :D hehehe...i'll personally volunteer to perfom the operations if anyone can find us a nice patch of land to set up on.
And who will perform the one on you?

Read Anthem by Ayn Rand.

How good would a utopian society be? I mean, if everything was just so perfect, we'd lose contact with how precious freedom really is.. :)

Losing contact with how precious freedom is....losing respect for those who achieved and defend aformentioned freedom...hmm...sounds like America

I'd say the most farcical of all utopian social ideals is the most naive and unrealistic of them all: anarchism.


In fact it is so obviously ill-concieved and destructively unrealistic that it has not been tried a single time, anywhere on earth.

Losing contact with how precious freedom is....losing respect for those who achieved and defend aformentioned freedom...hmm...sounds like America

Indeed, electing george bush and his gang of frauds! It is unthinkable.

That all the blood spilled to keep america out of the hands of tyrants and to integrate every group of people into full american freedom is within inches of being layed to waste by this crooked fool and his cronies.

No one knows how america came to this, or if they do, they've not told the rest of us.

How good would a utopian society be? I mean, if everything was just so perfect, we'd lose contact with how precious freedom really is.. :)

Then would not be perfect, I know that you are talking about socialism there, so just a quote by Baukhunin (it´s not exactly like this, but the message is this) "Freedom without socialism is brutallity; Socialism without freedom is slavery"
So, in a "perfect" society people would still be free enough to do anything they want (as long they do not hurt anyone) and everyone would still have a nice level of socialism, such as universal healthcare, education and etc...
I see it like this, the basic society is a socialist one, where everyone enjoy the same basics. Eveyone has the same education/healthcare/(sorry, english is not my language, I don´t know how to say "everyone live in houses of the same size" in one word)/public transportation/ etc... BUT, you still have money on your job to buy clothes, cars, television, computers; you know, things that you can live without, but, we all love to have.
Anyway, that´s utopic to me and I don´t see how it constrain any serious freedom (unless you say "hey, I work harder, I want a bigger house", I say that this is not an option once there people living in the strees).
Of course, bring then the question of the land to farms, for example, since, makes no logic everyone living on same house sizes, but this guy has a huge amount of land,the solution is to let him keep only what he uses. A serious problem here in brasil is that it´s easier for a company to get a investment if it owns a lot of land, so, while people are starving to death, companies keep lands without planting anything, just as a guarantee ( <- this word exists?) to the bank that they will pay the debt (if they don´t, the bank grab the land, and, it´s only because of this that they get the loan), so, the solution to me is the government divide all the land necessary to build houses and public buildings and then sell what´s left to whoever wants to buy do whatever he wants. But, it has to go through that really unpleasent stage of transition, where all the land belongs to the government, however, different from socialism, the government has to build it all and sell it as fast as possible.
Sorry if I did not made myself clear.

Indeed, electing george bush and his gang of frauds! It is unthinkable.

That all the blood spilled to keep america out of the hands of tyrants and to integrate every group of people into full american freedom is within inches of being layed to waste by this crooked fool and his cronies.

No one knows how america came to this, or if they do, they've not told the rest of us.

And when uneducated and ungreatful liberal children proclaim their President, the very man keeping them safe at night in the greatest nation on earth, the enemy...

You sir, are a perfect example of my previous post. Thank you.

And when uneducated and ungreatful liberal children proclaim their President, the very man keeping them safe at night in the greatest nation on earth, the enemy...

You sir, are a perfect example of my previous post. Thank you.


What kind of delusional idiot considers there to be "ungreatful liberal children."

The world may never know.


I dont suppose you'd get the allusion, but alot of people can see Papa Monzano and Osama bin Bokonon's little game for what it is.

What kind of delusional idiot considers there to be "ungreatful liberal children."

The world may never know.


I dont suppose you'd get the allusion, but alot of people can see Papa Monzano and Osama bin Bokonon's little game for what it is.

Delusional idiot? Look at yourself, fool, calling the war on terror a game. Now, act civilized and comment on utopian societies instead of flaming others. Delusional idiot indeed.

I'd say the most farcical of all utopian social ideals is the most naive and unrealistic of them all: anarchism.


In fact it is so obviously ill-concieved and destructively unrealistic that it has not been tried a single time, anywhere on earth.

Define: "Anarchism"
A lot of people torching buildings and running around naked is "anarchism" as much as a small society without leadership where everyone works together in a very organized way.
Anarchism should not be confused as a society without rules. Specially for having no government taking the leash, rules are REALLY necessary and, the difference is that the society itself decide what are the rules, and not the government.
And you are VERY VERY VERY wrong about he "not been tried a single time" as there were at least 2 "official" anarchist colonies here in brasil, and other 2 that can be considered anarchists, (but I don´t call it "official" because it had no theorical lead, but were societies without leaders that lasted long).
All these colonies ended because the angry government invaded and trashed it all. All of them. The 2 "official" colonies lasted little, like 2 or 3 years, other one was a group of people that simply gathered in a place and started to live together, without leadership, lasted 1 year and the last example (in brasil only, dunno about other places in the world) was of black slaves who hid in improvised tribes in the woods after escaping from their white masters, the larger one lasted 140 years. Without leadership whatsoever. Just a lot of people willing to respect the rules in order to survive.

Explaining a little better:
The 2 "officials" colonies where of italian imigrants who had read about anarchist and decided to put it in pratic. The monarchy of Brasil supported the attemp and let they start their colonies without trouble, and, they lived without trouble, but the monarchy was overthrown in order to make Brasil a republic and so, the army destroied these two, pacific colonies. (who were even starting to take people from near villages who were amazed of how well the colonies worked)

About the topic....Look at the Soviet Union.

Delusional idiot? Look at yourself, fool, calling the war on terror a game. Now, act civilized and comment on utopian societies instead of flaming others. Delusional idiot indeed.


So ya didnt get the allusion. Figures.

Also, as the person who started flaming on this thread, you should perhaps take your own advice.

Define: "Anarchism"
A lot of people torching buildings and running around naked is "anarchism" as much as a small society without leadership where everyone works together in a very organized way.
Anarchism should not be confused as a society without rules. Specially for having no government taking the leash, rules are REALLY necessary and, the difference is that the society itself decide what are the rules, and not the government.
And you are VERY VERY VERY wrong about he "not been tried a single time" as there were at least 2 "official" anarchist colonies here in brasil, and other 2 that can be considered anarchists, (but I don´t call it "official" because it had no theorical lead, but were societies without leaders that lasted long).
All these colonies ended because the angry government invaded and trashed it all. All of them. The 2 "official" colonies lasted little, like 2 or 3 years, other one was a group of people that simply gathered in a place and started to live together, without leadership, lasted 1 year and the last example (in brasil only, dunno about other places in the world) was of black slaves who hid in improvised tribes in the woods after escaping from their white masters, the larger one lasted 140 years. Without leadership whatsoever. Just a lot of people willing to respect the rules in order to survive.



I'm talking about the anarchism in the form of anarcho-socialism, not in band or tribal collectives.

So ya didnt get the allusion. Figures.

Also, as the person who started flaming on this thread, you should perhaps take your own advice.

Yeah...definately don't see where I flamed you specifically prior to your "delusional idiot" word vomit. Regardless...back to the topic...

Utopian societies cannot work. The human psyche won't allow it. Conflict is what drives us, be it social, political, economic, or military. Perfection cannot be achieved.

For those who believe in God, even he got angered often and had to be talked down by mortals. God murdered as well.

Yeah...definately don't see where I flamed you specifically prior to your "delusional idiot" word vomit.




And when uneducated and ungreatful liberal children proclaim their President, the very man keeping them safe at night in the greatest nation on earth, the enemy...


Is there something wrong with your memory?

I'm talking about the anarchism in the form of anarcho-socialism, not in band or tribal collectives.

So, why do you think that it´s more naive then "ok, so, eventually, a small group of people will have all the money, but they will have ethics and will not use this money to control the government"?

All ideologies are naive, anarchism is just one where I think that freedom is not used as a excuse for opression. And I do not believe in an anarchist society of the size of a country, so I think that band and tribal collectives are fine examples of anarchism, as we do not believe in countries, there is no problem in transforming one huge country in thousands of little societies that help each other when one need.

So, why do you think that it´s more naive then "ok, so, eventually, a small group of people will have all the money, but they will have ethics and will not use this money to control the government"?

All ideologies are naive, anarchism is just one where I think that freedom is not used as a excuse for opression. And I do not believe in an anarchist society of the size of a country, so I think that band and tribal collectives are fine examples of anarchism, as we do not believe in countries, there is no problem in transforming one huge country in thousands of little societies that help each other when one need.


I'm by no means a libertarian capitalist.

Pardon, but there is a huge problem in "transforming one huge country into thousands of little societies that help eachother." It is ludicrous.

People used to live in little bands and collectives - until they were able to produce food and thereby increase their population density, create food surpluses, specialize, organize and eventually militarize and gain control over additional resources.

There is no reason whatsoever to think we can revert to ways that dissapeared universally as part of the progress leading to where we are now.

Statements like "as we do not believe in countries, there is no problem in transforming one huge country in thousands of little societies that help each other when one need" are exactly what I meant when I said it was hopelessly naive and unrealistic.

And when uneducated and ungreatful liberal children proclaim their President, the very man keeping them safe at night in the greatest nation on earth, the enemy...


Is there something wrong with your memory?

Are you uneducated, New Granada? Are you ungreatful?

If so, I apologize for offending you with my generalizations. When I posted that, I was ranting about the fools in my highschool who were almost anti-american because it was a fad...because songs told them to be.

Being Liberal is not a problem, for it takes all types of people to make up this nation. Criticizing Bush is not a problem, for people's opinions vary.

Being stupid is a problem. Ranting about how horrible Bush is for no intelligent reason is a problem. Pitting the "blue" states against the "red" states is a problem. Why? Because at the end of the day each one of us in an American, not a democrat or a republican. This is something that seems to have been forgotten.

So I repeat myself. If you, NG, are uneducated, ungreatful, "stupid," or a person who often rants aimlessly about Bush or often talks about the "two different Americas," then I apologize for my statements offending you. If you do not fall under any of these catagories, however, and I haven't accused you of doing so yet, then I cannot understand why you would have a problem with my original statement.

Now, you outright calling me a "delusional idiot" for my non-extremist politicial comparison between America and New Genoa's perfect society is not only closed-minded but flaming, flame-baiting, and trolling. While the first offense is frowned upon in society, the latter three are illegal on this site.

Good day.

I believe Ben Franklin said, "If men were angels, no government would be required". But we're not angels. We're lying, cheating, selfish pricks with no concern for anyone but ourselves 90% of the time. Utopean schemes have at their heart a fatal flaw. They assume human beings are altruistic by nature. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" Sounds fair. But who determines abilities and needs? Big surprise. Each time this philosophy is tryed, it ends in death camps, poverty, and oppresion.

Oh boy, another capitalism/fascism vs. Socialism/anarchy thread.

I think you'd have a hard time getting there with people. Monkeys, maybe, but not people.

I'd say the most farcical of all utopian social ideals is the most naive and unrealistic of them all: anarchism.

In fact it is so obviously ill-concieved and destructively unrealistic that it has not been tried a single time, anywhere on earth.

#1 anarchism is not a form of utopian socialism or of utopianism in general.
#2 anarchism has been attempted multiple times, several of them on rather large scales. the main problem has been being outgunned by fascists and/or authoritarian communists (who would rather risk losing everything than let us win)

I believe Ben Franklin said, "If men were angels, no government would be required". But we're not angels. We're lying, cheating, selfish pricks with no concern for anyone but ourselves 90% of the time.

but then again, how does putting a tiny minority of these lying, cheating, selfish pricks in charge of others and giving them tons of coercive power over the rest of us make any sense at all?

but then again, how does putting a tiny minority of these lying, cheating, selfish pricks in charge of others and giving them tons of coercive power over the rest of us make any sense at all?

It doesnt make any sense, it's wrong and the scum should be hanged from lightposts and have their throats cut. They should be lined up in alleyways and shot.

HOWEVER, this *does not imply that anarchism is good or practical or even reasonable!*

What experience teaches humanity is that the best form of government is that enjoyed by the fortunate and happy citizens of northern europe.

A healthy mix of liberal democracy, socialism and capitalism.

#1 anarchism is not a form of utopian socialism or of utopianism in general.
#2 anarchism has been attempted multiple times, several of them on rather large scales. the main problem has been being outgunned by fascists and/or authoritarian communists (who would rather risk losing everything than let us win)


The only sustainable "anarchistic" socieites in human history have been hunter-gathering tribes and bands.

They cease to be anarchist once they either develop food production or are conquered by people who already have.

There is nothing unreasonable about large organized groups taking over small disorganized ones.

It is unreasonable to believe that people can revert to ways which ended as part of the progress towards the point at which we are at now.

Read Anthem by Ayn Rand.

Great book. Really shows us how much we need the word "I".