You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Hello...my name is Everitt Mickey and
I looked up Robert Heinlein and according to his Wikipedia biography was "extremely liberal" from a quote about him by Isaac Asimov. Is anarchism more a kindred frame of mind to liberalism or conservatism or is it unique to itself?
anarchism is unique to each individual person
that's the no rulers part.
dunno about Wikipedia...I've found it to be extremely biased.
The closest anarchism reference that I can recall that was applied to a large somewhat concentrated mass of people was after the Israelites fled Egypt. In the promised land they had judges who settled disputes among people, but that was the extent of a central government. They were not satisfied with that arrangement and demanded a king. Mankind seems to be a generally dissatisfied creature with whatever his current state is demanding to be controlled when he gets tired of anarchy and freedom when he gets fed up with oppression.
the point I'm trying to make is that anarchy is NOT a group thing.
it's individualistic.
my post attempted to explain what it meant to me.
Perhaps anarchy isn't the best word..but I don't know of another.
I think this is very important...
Because by "definition" I'm an anarchist, but I'm not the anarchist people think of when they hear the word... Like I'm not out there burning flags and engaging in terrorism like lots of people think anarchist do, yes some do those things, but not most by a long shot.
I'd bet most of the planet's population are true anarchist, with the exception of the elite, and don't even realize it.
It's been one of those words that's been stained by propaganda, just like conspiracy theorist which wasn't considered to be a bad thing until propaganda was released in the 1960s by the CIA to discredit those who questioned the Warren Commission... they were obviously attempting to cover their tracks, and were successful in doing so because still to this day no one has been held responsible for murdering our president... you know, the one president who wanted to "splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds”.
yup..my point exactly
I'm an individual
I'm not defined by group think
I think that a state of anarchy is a breeding ground for radicalization due to the frustration with a complete lack of consensus with everything from support for an army for protection to what day does the garbage get picked up. The classic reference to herding cats or crickets comes to mind.
there IS no 'state of anarchy'
anarchy has nothing to do with 'state'
anarchists...like me...can live fairly well IN a state.
(anarchists don't band together to MAKE states)
and Anarchists can live perfectly fine alone.
put five anarchists in a room and you'll find six or seven different opinions...
(yeah I know...kinda strange huh?)
No, not strange at all. In my experience, when faced with a problem, people who know what they are doing will always have different solutions to the same problem. You would think just the opposite. When I said "state" above I meant condition.
what condition your condition is in?
well stated!