sodbuster Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 Works well in small settings. Not across an entire population -- that's a utopian myth. There's no way to deal with conflict or scarcity of resources in an anarchic society. Most any clash between "classes" of people (or gender, or ethnicity or races) comes down to someone trying to protect what they've got by excluding others from attaining it. Then the other group pipes up about being held back. That's human nature and anarchy isn't going to fix it. People can debate whether authority should be proactive or not, but there will never be any successful true anarchy. What does any of that have to do with you erroneously saying that anarchists can't be organized? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 There can be order without coercive authority. Nobody among my friends has any authority over the others, yet somehow we manage to get together and watch football on Sunday and everybody gets sufficiently drunk and full of pizza. The idea is that if they don't like how something is done, they can go off and do it on their own. If you consider the actual definition of the word, disorder is a component of anarchy, so your Sunday football & pizza example doesn't really work. I get what you're trying to say, but snafu's original comment wasn't off base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 There can be order without coercive authority. Nobody among my friends has any authority over the others, yet somehow we manage to get together and watch football on Sunday and everybody gets sufficiently drunk and full of pizza. The idea is that if they don't like how something is done, they can go off and do it on their own. Individuals voluntarily working to a common good doesn't run counter to anarchy. Individuals being forced to contribute to the common good does. Your example doesn't scale. If one of your friends started being an inveterate !@#$, he'd quickly be ostracized by mutual agreement, enforced simply by everybody not returning his calls. When you're talking about an entire state, ostracizing the inveterate !@#$s doesn't quite work that way. Turns out, you need some sort of mechanism to ostracize them. That ends up requiring some sort of bureaucracy and authority. Short version: you'd have a point, if you were friends with the entire country, you idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 (edited) Your example doesn't scale. If one of your friends started being an inveterate !@#$, he'd quickly be ostracized by mutual agreement, enforced simply by everybody not returning his calls. When you're talking about an entire state, ostracizing the inveterate !@#$s doesn't quite work that way. Turns out, you need some sort of mechanism to ostracize them. That ends up requiring some sort of bureaucracy and authority. Short version: you'd have a point, if you were friends with the entire country, you idiot. Good we're not talking about scaling it to an entire country. The fact that they're organized isn't the irony. The irony is that they're protesting a statist losing the election. Edited November 13, 2016 by sodbuster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 (edited) Almost choked when I heard McConnell lecturing the Dems on how they had to work with Trump since he's the rightfully elected president. He's right but what a piece of excrement. Edited November 13, 2016 by Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 Almost choked when I heard McConnell lecturing the Dems on how they had to work with Trump since he's the rightfully elected president. He's right but what a piece of excrement. Now that's funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 Almost choked when I heard McConnell lecturing the Dems on how they had to work with Trump since he's the rightfully elected president. He's right but what a piece of excrement. Sad thing is he's one of the more reasonable pieces of excrement on the Hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 Almost choked when I heard McConnell lecturing the Dems on how they had to work with Trump since he's the rightfully elected president. He's right but what a piece of excrement. Elections have consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Elections have consequences. Yes the 3rd grade Hill rhetoric continues to reign supreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Almost choked when I heard McConnell lecturing the Dems on how they had to work with Trump since he's the rightfully elected president. He's right but what a piece of excrement. Yes the 3rd grade Hill rhetoric continues to reign supreme. Just like in the post I quoted first. Potty mouth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Yes the 3rd grade Hill rhetoric continues to reign supreme. He's just following the words of President Obama -On Jan. 23, 2009, "the House Republican leadership met with President Obama at the White House," say CBS News Capitol Hill producer Jill Jackson. "And the president told the Republicans elections have consequences, and I won." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/midterm-elections-how-the-dems-lost-the-house/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Well the Unifier in Chief said this: Republicans had driven the economy into a ditch and then stood by and criticized while Democrats pulled it out. Now that progress has been made, Obama said, “we can’t have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 He's just following the words of President Obama -On Jan. 23, 2009, "the House Republican leadership met with President Obama at the White House," say CBS News Capitol Hill producer Jill Jackson. "And the president told the Republicans elections have consequences, and I won." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/midterm-elections-how-the-dems-lost-the-house/ Like I said, third grade rhetoric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Just like in the post I quoted first. Potty mouth! But I'm a jerkoff on a message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 But I'm a jerkoff on a message board. True Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 True I'm building bridges to something we cal all agree on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 15, 2016 Share Posted November 15, 2016 But I'm a jerkoff on a message board. Just seeing this. Join the club. Membership is free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts