NationStates Jolt Archive

Do you think that the political/philosophical creed of Anarchy is all to often used as an excuse to be/act like a total ass? Starting in the 19th centruy and all the way up to the present, Anarchist actions only seem to bring violence and bloodshed and detract from the real issues others are protesting? Is there any real justification for all the bloody actions carried out in the name of Anrchism? IE: The recent beating of a SF Police Officer, The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, the vandalism, riots and violence carried out by "Anarchists" @ any major political protest recently (G8 summits, etc.)

Do these people really beleive their actions contribute anything to the dialogue? Do they even care?

I recently had to work with a pair of self-proclaimed Anarchists who, when I informed them of a local 24-Hour Grocery store exclaimed: "Cool, those are so easy to steal from!" and tried to justify their intended theft with Anarchist doctrine.. To me, this kind of thing smacks of opportunism and selfishness being justified by a political doctrine that has long since lost any real meaning beyond an excuse to cause trouble for other people.

While I beleive and participate in Pirate Utopias, a common rallying point of modern Anarchists, it pisses me off when they use these as a successful Anarchist model. Its not Anarchy that makes a Pirate Utopia work, its Community and respect for others.

What your thoughts on this political movement?

Hell yeah I believe inpirate utopias! :D

PWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That poll has 3 pro-anarchy options

As in any political movement there are always those who will use their doctrine to rationalize certain questionable acts. I often lean towards anarcho-captialism, but I would never use vandalism to achieve it.

ive never understood why anarchists blow things up. you get to reading about the political ideas, start thinking "this is kinda cool", then someone blows something up. that takes care of that.

i think 2 things

1) the kind of people who join a movement known for violence, tend to be attracted to that violence.

2) extreme politics that are unlikely to ever be adopted tend to be full of assholes. it takes a certain turn of personality to fight the unwinnable fight. its not unique to anarchists.

PWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That poll has 3 pro-anarchy options

All 4 are pro-anarchy I think. Fuck'em all I say, that's anarchists and everyone else. True anarchy leaves no room for discrimination.

Anarchy would be a great thing, but there are too many idiots in the world today to make it work. Government is a burden, full of its own idiots, but it does keep the security, which is something that Anarchy can never promise. I personally wish government would disappear... (knock on wood) ;)

ive never understood why anarchists blow things up. you get to reading about the political ideas, start thinking "this is kinda cool", then someone blows something up. that takes care of that.

i think 2 things

1) the kind of people who join a movement known for violence, tend to be attracted to that violence.

2) extreme politics that are unlikely to ever be adopted tend to be full of assholes. it takes a certain turn of personality to fight the unwinnable fight. its not unique to anarchists.

Well said! Maximum point made, minimum words.

If people want to be anarchists, then they should try and figure out ways the system could work without crime taking place. People who use it as an excuse for violence deserve double the sentence anyone commiting an equivalent crime gets, just for being idiots.

Anarchy can be a confusing subject to touch on since the media portrays it as a group of heathens who only want chaos and destruction. For most anarchists this is not true. Anarchy is more about ending racism, sexism, sizism, etc. being more self reliant and self sufficent so we don't have to depend on capitalistic corporations for all our basic human needs, it's mainly just learning to do things for yourself in a world where we are taught that no matter the conditions people can do things for us, along with a slew of other issues. All the anarchists I know are genuinly nice people, who care about things bigger than themselves.

I recently had to work with a pair of self-proclaimed Anarchists who, when I informed them of a local 24-Hour Grocery store exclaimed: "Cool, those are so easy to steal from!"

Now I have no idea if these people are true anarchists, but if they are they are probably only stealing the things they absolutly need from the store, though most of what they take can probably be found behind the store by dumpster diving. If they are just stealing from a small indepently owned grocery store, that isn't anarchy. If they are taking more than they need, that is not anarchy.

ive never understood why anarchists blow things up

Me neither. All I can say is that these are the people that have lost their sense of what anarchy truely means, which if you get right down to it, it's peace. These are the people who become what they orginally hated. They've forgotten that peace can't be obtained through war.

I hope I've provided some insite into the matter.

Now I have no idea if these people are true anarchists, but if they are they are probably only stealing the things they absolutly need from the store, though most of what they take can probably be found behind the store by dumpster diving. If they are just stealing from a small indepently owned grocery store, that isn't anarchy. If they are taking more than they need, that is not anarchy.


Actually, they were being paid quite well...they had no need to steal anything. Otherwise, I would have understood their reaction. I've done so myself, but I call it self-preservation. They were very nice people and both quite intelligent, just confused (IMO) in the application of their politics regarding their actions. None of my complaints would apply to most Anarchists I have met. Its just the few that spoil it for the rest.

I don't see where be egaltarianism equates to anarchism. I'm all for equality and the abandoning of ISMS (sexism, racism, ismism, etc.) and I like the *ideals and hopes* of much Anarchist philosophies and goals. I'm just sick and tired of people using Anarchism as an excuse to be assholes. Certainly the media gives a bad slant because of biased reporting, but I trust the media even less than I would a van full of crackheads to begin with. The fact, sadly, is that the hooligans @ various protests and actions all seem to label themselves as Anarchists as an excuse for their actions. Why can't they just be honest and call themselves Shit Disturbists or some such catchy Ismist pronoun?

Anarchists should first shut up and then grow up.
I met a self-proclaimed anarchist at a party about three weeks ago, and his "argumentation" made no sense whatsoever. Maybe he was just a bad example for his "movement" but his "arguments" (I almost dare not call that stupidity argument!) were illogical, easily proven wrong, farfetched and what not... In short, plain stupid wrong.
In my humble opinion, Anarchy is not a valid political view: It is what a tolerant society has to put up with - to a certain point.

The freedoms of one person end where the freedoms of another person with equal rights are repressed. If only more people had the sense to acknowledge that, life and this world would be a lot better.

Anarchism is a valid political philosophy. Anarchism and anarchy are two separate things, and the two should not be confused. With that said, however, I think that the Downmarching Void may have a point, that those two people were just assholes, and using anarchism as an excuse.

Anarchy can be a confusing subject to touch on since the media portrays it as a group of heathens who only want chaos and destruction. For most anarchists this is not true. Anarchy is more about ending racism, sexism, sizism, etc. being more self reliant and self sufficent so we don't have to depend on capitalistic corporations for all our basic human needs, it's mainly just learning to do things for yourself in a world where we are taught that no matter the conditions people can do things for us, along with a slew of other issues. All the anarchists I know are genuinly nice people, who care about things bigger than themselves.

I can't comprehend how any Anarchist can actually belive in an Anarchist Political Philosophy. I am a very open person, I can respect a persons beliefs, and thier way of life, But 'Anarchy' is something i cannot understand.

For a start, all Anarchists seem to be hypocritic children. Every 'Anarchist' I know of, is unemployed and supported by the state. How is that being "self sufficent". I assume that nearly all of the money they recive goes towards alchohol, because the only thing I've ever seen them do is getting drunk infront of the local theatre or other public place, which i can only understand as provication.
But the thing that pisses me off the most - If we actually did in live in a totally Anarchist society, the 'Anarchist' would be fucked. They are nearly all unresponsable, primative children. The would get the shit kicked out of them nearly everyday (because they are all pussys), and end up starving to death due to there inabilty to support themselves.

I have to say that 'Anarchism' is not just an excuse for being an ass, you can throw in being lazy, ignorant and selfish too.

I have come to the conclusion that 'Anarchists' don't become 'Anarchists' because they belive in Anarchism. From personal experience, it would seem that young adults become 'Anarchists' due to a strict and unloving parent. They cope with thier rejection by finding themselves a new 'family' (Anarchists), and employ a dress code, that for many, is the only (if indirect) way of rebellion against said parent.

Anarchy isn't valid at all. In a universe where life arranges itself most efficiently as possible, everything inefficient eventually withers away. Anarchy cannot be maintained because to organize it would be against anarchy itself, and to guide it would also be against the foundation of anarchy. If all governments fell apart and the world did fall into anarchy, there would undoubtedly be people who would organize new political entities, which would probably be dictatorial in a chaotic world. Simply put, anarchy cannot be maintained indefinitely. A new political body would emerge, and reverse the trend of ungovernment.

The freedoms of one person end where the freedoms of another person with equal rights are repressed. If only more people had the sense to acknowledge that, life and this world would be a lot better.
That is the basic principle of anarchism. Your freedom ends were my rights begin. Not at breaking some arbitrary rules that some criminals have set up.

That is the basic principle of anarchism. Your freedom ends were my rights begin. Not at breaking some arbitrary rules that some criminals have set up.

'Freedom' means freedom FROM, not freedom TO.

No, the excuse for being an asshole is called "libertarianism."

I would be more sympathetic if Anarchy was actually a valid political system, but what it is is stupid idealist crap which will inevitably hand government over to those with the largest military powers. However nor am I sympathetic to the fact that despite the fact no one seems to have noticed, some of the anarchist demonstrators in Gleneagles are acting like terrorists. Attacking people for their own political ideology? Hmmm...why does that sound familiar?

'Freedom' means freedom FROM, not freedom TO.
Ok, say liberty then. Liberty means freedom from coersion, that you may do what you want as long as you don't hurt others. Or in other words, liberty means the non-initiation of force. Sometimes liberty is also called also called freedom.

I can't answer your poll really, cause it's not a question of either or or. In my opinion. See, a lot of those people who call themselves anarchists are just, yes, assholes that use anarchism as an excuse to break stuff. These guys don't know what anarchism is about, they have probably never read a line of Kropotkin or anything else in that direction. Those who have thought things over a bit more carefully I can respect more. I think that those people are mostly not assholes. Then again, personally I think that instant personal freedom can't work in a wider range, just think about it. People are generally too stupid to be able to handle that kind of a responsibility. That's why I like to consider myself some sort of socialist, rather than anarchist. :)

...The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand...
Now, I'm not a specialist, but wasn't the Black Hand primarily a Serbian Nationalist Group?
Wouldn't the idea of being nationalist contradict the idea of being an anarchist?

Well, personally, I love the idea of Anarchy...but I'm realistic.

It will never work.

The central concept of true anarchy is simple: "order without control"

A basic understanding of human nature obliterates any hope that that relatively simple statement will ever, as a "political system", be achieved by our species.

Now, I'm not a specialist, but wasn't the Black Hand primarily a Serbian Nationalist Group?
Wouldn't the idea of being nationalist contradict the idea of being an anarchist?

My mistake. Must have been a Freudian slip prompted by my opinion of Serbian politics.

I have to admit that when I was around 15 or 16 I was a selp-professed Anarchist until read into it deeper and realized the philosophy was obviously to hopeful or even demanding of intelligence and good nature in humans. My biggest clue was the number of dipsticks who were pro-anarchist and used it as an excuse for indiscriminate self-interest. That and the number of anti-anarchists who accused it of being an excuse for indiscriminate self-interest. Both just confirmed the fact that the lowest common denominator is the final arbiter in any politcal practice.

No, the excuse for being an asshole is called "libertarianism."

I don't remember the last Libertarian protestors who caved someone's face in and smashed up storefronts.

If you want to talk about political ideology justifying being an asshole, you really shouldn't be throwing stones from a glass-house like that. Nothing in the history of anarchism compares even remotely to some of the actions of government. If you want to accuse anarchists of being assholes, then what about the Holocaust or the Stalinist purges, which both killed millions of people. Now honestly, if anarchism is bad because a protester attacks a cop, what does that say about government?

Obviously, everyone would object that those are isolated examples and not representative of all governments, but remember, too, that the punks and thugs are not representative of all anarchists, either. Judging anarchism by their actions is like judging all government by the actions of Hitler or Stalin.

My mistake. Must have been a Freudian slip prompted by my opinion of Serbian politics.
Don't worry, Anarchists murdered plenty of other politicians, a Russian Czar, Spanish kings (I think) and so on...

I don't remember the last Libertarian protestors who caved someone's face in and smashed up storefronts.

There are other, more sinister ways of being an asshole than violence.

If you want to talk about political ideology justifying being an asshole, you really shouldn't be throwing stones from a glass-house like that. Nothing in the history of anarchism compares even remotely to some of the actions of government. If you want to accuse anarchists of being assholes, then what about the Holocaust or the Stalinist purges, which both killed millions of people. Now honestly, if anarchism is bad because a protester attacks a cop, what does that say about government?

Obviously, everyone would object that those are isolated examples and not representative of all governments, but remember, too, that the punks and thugs are not representative of all anarchists, either. Judging anarchism by their actions is like judging all government by the actions of Hitler or Stalin.

I never said Anarchist are assholes, I said its an excuse to be one. Hitler and Stalin didn't bother with excuses. The problem is that the most noticable Narchists are the wankers that use it for an excuse to be hooligans. I'm questioning the continued validity of the Anarchist movement in the eyes of NSers, due to the actions of such hooligans.

I'm questioning the continued validity of the Anarchist movement in the eyes of NSers, due to the actions of such hooligans.Well, to reiterate Letila's post, do the actions of Hitler and Stalin cause you to question the continued validity of governments?

Well, to reiterate Letila's post, do the actions of Hitler and Stalin cause you to question the continued validity of governments?

Yes! Not questioning the validity of any given Govt' is what leads to Stalins and Hitlers in the first place.