I-Mockery Forum - Reply to Topic

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options Automatically parse links in text

Oct 14th, 2003 07:17 PM

KellyGayos

Oct 14th, 2003 03:46 PM

kellychaos

Strive to support athletics

Oct 14th, 2003 11:30 AM

mburbank

i support hose

Oct 14th, 2003 11:28 AM

Zhukov

No, you're the loony idealist.

Oct 14th, 2003 05:40 AM

No, they were named after Charles Dickens.

Oct 14th, 2003 03:44 AM

The_Rorschach

No, they were named after a Tahitian whore

Oct 14th, 2003 12:12 AM

El Blanco

No, they were named after a Mongolian gameshow host.

Oct 13th, 2003 11:56 PM

Big Papa Goat

No, they were named after the Soviet foreign minister.

Oct 13th, 2003 11:52 PM

Jeanette X

Moltovs were named after a Jewish kid in WWII who used them in an uprising against the Nazis in his ghetto.

Oct 13th, 2003 11:38 PM

Protoclown

YOU'RE ALL IN MY HEAD

Oct 13th, 2003 08:44 PM

kahljorn

You mean "Anarchy as utopia", per se?

As in, if the World could turn within government and laws, it would be because the World was in perfect harmony?

I've never read Bakunin, but I understand the idea of Utopia through Anarchy.
It's kind of ironic :O

I love Molitov's.

Oct 13th, 2003 06:23 PM

Helm

....or if you read Bakunin then it becomes an actual sociopolitical viewpoint and you don't even have to throw one molotv coctail.

Oct 13th, 2003 04:09 PM

kahljorn

I started this thread in memory of all the 14 year old anarchists. Long live their schooling days.

Anarchy can also be a state of mind, a philosophy, almost.

Oct 13th, 2003 03:56 PM

incurable paranoiac

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

I'd support Calvinism but I'm scared of another Beat Happening box set.

priceless.

Oct 13th, 2003 03:42 PM

Anti-Xocial

I don't think is necissary that a dictionary definition of anarchy be presented, but I do find it interesting that so many people support it. Personally, I don't think that a system can really be based on anarchy in the long run. Anarch is temporary...throughout time and ages, man has needed to establish some form of order in whatever kind of surrounding chaos. "Lord Of The Flies" gives you a good look into that world. It would be dillusional to think that anything can be established if based on anarchy, rather than to think that anarchy can "shake things up" a bit and then we resume life in a different order or pattern once again...and hopefully for the better.

Come to think of it: ANARCHY .....NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oct 13th, 2003 03:29 PM

El Blanco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

I'd support Calvinism

Fine, but I ain't dressing up as a tiger.

Oct 13th, 2003 03:23 PM

Perndog

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zhukov

And I'd like to hear why people can't all jus' get along.

Right. Mom, can I be a loony idealist, too?

Oct 13th, 2003 02:56 PM

Abcdxxxx

I'd support Calvinism but I'm scared of another Beat Happening box set.

Oct 13th, 2003 02:43 PM

El Blanco

Quote:

Originally Posted by ranxer

i thought you just supported fascism for no reason blanco..
when did you become in charge?

In due time. In due time.

Quote:

i think anarchy could work AFTER we have peace on earth and an embracing of earth as one co-existing family.

And thats going to happen as soon as humanity is wiped off the face of the Earth.

Quote:

which is probably hundreds of generations off if we survive corporate enslavement.

Same old same old from you.

Oct 13th, 2003 02:22 PM

Anonymous

I'm all for Noah's-archy.

Oct 13th, 2003 02:12 PM

Helm

Quote:

All political ideaologies are cyclical. A never ending loop of reactionary philosophies born of dystopic realities and disillusioned spirits. No matter what we embrace now, it will, at best, be a temporary solution. Plato was a bit of an idiot, his work the Republic was viewed by my Forefathers as a farce, and I heartily agree. . .So, if the best we can hope for is a temporary solution, it really doesn't matter at all which we choose. Viewing things in the context of my country alone, where more money was spent by the Government pursuing Microsoft than keeping tabs on known terrorists, I think we would most benefit by a powerful and influential Aristocracy.

Not to replace the govenrment, but to balance it.

Ah, the short-term solution. I am drastically less against what you propose in that context. In fact, I believe any govermental change to be inherent to the dynamic that constantly refines political practise for the benefit of us all. For example, the shift into fascism which created the second world war was the mother of great atrocities against humanity. But it also brought the awareness that such tragedy brings. This awareness then applies to all modern political thought, and it's memory steers humanity in a direction I find more efficient.

In that sense, your aristocracy, if applied (until it is replaced by the next thing) would provide more important political memory to the whole of humanity.

As to your suggestion that history moves in circles, I adhere to the Marxist (boo! shame!) refinement of this idea, that history moves in a spiral. The direction of this spiral, if any is debatable, but this spiral geometrically narrowing in diameter I believe to be fact. Thinking in this way, humanity IS growing, working towards a something, even if the majority of men fail to acknowledge this, because they dissagree with it or because they're not equipped to make such judgement all-together.

Two steps forward, one step back as it were.

As to a more long-term solution in forms of goverment, I believe a form of libertarian (not nec. in the way you americans use the term, the more traditional concept of maximum freedom) anarchocommunism would eventually be applied when the balance of geopolitical power is no longer a pressing issue (by means of stellar expansion, most possibly), and the nature of man as an instinctual beast has been adequately leashed. Obviously, such a system of goverment would rely much on self-control and moderation, but I believe those qualities to be universally attainable given the proper education, genetic conditioning and gradual readjustment of the collective unconscious.

Edit: Oh and to say that Plato is an idiot is to brand yourself as someone who hasn't read his collected works. I might dissagree with 90% of what was attributed to him, but I believe words such as 'idiot' should be used in describing people such as Vincezeb, and not one of the most influental philosophers of all time.

Oct 13th, 2003 01:36 PM

Zhukov

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perndog

People need society and society needs rules.

Err... I think you meant to say "People need government..."

And I'd like to hear why people can't all jus' get along.

Oct 13th, 2003 01:33 PM

Perndog

Anarchy will always be a pipe dream. People need society and society needs rules. There is no other way to reconcile human diversity and make people get along.

Oct 13th, 2003 01:31 PM

Zhukov

I SUPPORT ANARCHISTS. To an extent.

Oct 13th, 2003 01:01 PM

ranxer

i thought you just supported fascism for no reason blanco..
when did you become in charge?

i think anarchy could work AFTER we have peace on earth and an embracing of earth as one co-existing family.. which is probably hundreds of generations off if we survive corporate enslavement.

This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

About Us |

Store |

Advertising |

Contact

Features

Shorts

Editorials

Games

Comics

Blogs

Forum

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts vB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off