Are there any real anarchists left? Or are they just a bunch of pussy college hipsters that couldn't knock over a house of cards with a sledge hammer...
mane i is tired of all des capitalist craKKKa fake ass honkys. all dey does is tryin ta promote da white ppl cauz. no boarders, no states, no banks, no police, no taxes, free healthcare, free houses, free water, free food, no laws, minority reprimanding, free electricity, free school(optional), free clothes is be da only way america will ever be worth a damn wit all des white conservatives america aint worth a shit.
@SIGN666 So you think that just because you attended a protest and read something off the internet you are "liberated" and "free"? Grow up, douche. Your'e probably a fucking hippie who went to a community college, which "changed everything". For all we know, YOU are being indoctrinated by some anarchists to cause civil unrest. But the most likely truth is you just read something stupid off the internet or like smashing windows.
Anarchists are the most miserable people in the world. I knew them in high school. Dressed in all black and alone. Some ended up homeless or in prison.
agent provocateurs all of them >thay take over real movements to shit on other peoples demonstrations and make a violent element to give the excuse of danger to justify goverments war on free speach with police and military presence and preventing the voice of all and discrediting movements...Problem reation solution and or FALSE FLAG and label domestic terrorist
I don't think this is Anarchism. This is a response from repressed people. Working within the system to fundamentally change the system is hopeless, the government is in power to perpetuate its own interests.
Monetarism is a morally bankrupted system. REVOLT>>REVOLUTION!
in my opinion, anarchy will only work if nearly 100% of the world population wants it and they all know they want it. even in that event, it will only be a matter of time before people start banding together for protection, and then these groups will merge, eventually making factions and nations, and one of the people will be bound to take charge, ending the anarchy. over all, anarchy is good for reform, but will never last.
@b3rtne But they aren't anarchists or protesting in the name of anarchy. They don't want the abolishing of order, they just want huge economic reforms and a change to a mix of socialism and democracy. They still want order, therefore should not label themselves anarchists.
@b3rtne Without a state, it descends into chaos. You will not have the ability to control anything, and the worst in people will come out when food runs short (money will become worthless, so people will quit their jobs and the industry would collapse). It will be chaos, you need a structure and order to keep people in line. Look at Somalia. The revolution and anarchy came, but then it was complete chaos and now it is a shit hole.
Money would be just as worthless as it is now. The only reason it's worth anything is because the state assigns value to it. Why wouldn't we be able to assign the same value? Would people quit their jobs? Yeah, probably. But that's on them. I don't think much would change as long as everyone kept a level head and realized that we don't need an oppressive owner controlling our every move. Although, people aren't rational or intelligent enough to allow that.
@b3rtne You wouldn't be able to assign value because you need a state and treasury. People would just go to bartering, which doesn't work. A lot of things would change, we need an organized structure in order to maintain society and not have chaos.
@anarcrustie There is a reason why people stopped bartering. Money is a good way to measure out all the items, its the perfect ratio. And there can still be injustice with bartering, just more so in the form of material items rather than cash and cheques.
@ebrowne369 personally i like bartering better than money but prefer neither, a gift economy.
but regardless, bartering clearly "works" fine, its probably been used more throughout history than any other system.
in regards to the general above conversation, these kids are totally anarchists insofar as they believe in stateless socialism. that is what they are fighting for, whether you aggree or disagree.
@anarcrustie That's just you agreeing. They were smashing windows and yelling abuse at police, nothing political about that. Anarchy isn't necessarily stateless socialism, and stateless socialism wouldn't work.
@ebrowne369 what? saying this is not political is ignorant as all hell. every attack is targeted: they attack banks, multinational corporations, and the police, because they are anti-capitalist and anti-state. this seems pretty obvious, actually.
did you see the image of the red and black flag with "direct action against capitalism" written on it?
@anarcrustie Yeah, but there is nothing clever about what they are doing. That is what I was trying to say.
Regardless of their cause, actions such as smashing windows and yelling abuse at officers will not achieve much regarding political change. The anarchist movement either has to up the ante and become genuine, off-the-grid guerillas, or become legitimate politicians and move to washington. Otherwise, the anarchist movement will be nothing but a bunch of vandals, kids and hippies.
@ebrowne369 there is a reasonable middle ground between congress and guerrilla warfare.
mass insurrections have been central to many revolutions in history, from 1789 to 1917 to the arab spring. admitedly they won't get far with only a handful of people, but when great numbers of people get organized enough to take over the streets, confront the police, etc, usually some kings are gonna get beheaded before they are through.
@anarcrustie Define "take over the streets". Doing a sit-in will result in you getting dragged out manually. Abusing an officer in a confrontation will just get you beat with a baton and arrested. I didn't mean congress literally, what I meant was improve your image and become legitimate. But what they are doing now will never work, especially if you go around smashing windows, doing graffiti and alienating yourself from the average citizen.
@ebrowne369 taking over the streets means holding the streets whether the police like it or not, and eventually defeating the police entirely. it means throwing back tear-gas cans, building and defending barricades, snatching back any who are arrested, breaking police lines, and, ultimately, this:
@SIGN666 im self-employed so i am my boss. so in that sense giving hand jobs to my boss would be the same as jerking off. and any man who says they have never jerked off is a fool or a liar. also, i never watch fox news if i can help it.
@SIGN666 must be hard having your bung-hole gang-raped in the holding cell every time you get arrested at one of these little anarchist brick throwing parties. you might be better off staying in moms basement and sniffing model airplane glue. then again, you are a self-described "anarcho-communist" which is synonymous with "complete idiot", so keep bashing those windows and watch out for your corn hole... tool.
You're an idiot, haven't you heard of noam choamsky, he is one of the most cited PHD in the world for his work in linguistics. He is also an anarchists. FUCK the RNC, fuck imperialist american assholes, FUCK CAPITALISM. Long live anarcho-communism
you fucking "anarchists" are such a joke. a bunch of skinny fucks with daddy issues who think its fun to put on a mask and pitch a brick through a window. notice you don't see any "anarchists" over age 25, most are in their late teens and early 20s. thats because at some point most people just grow the fuck up and get a job.
Damn anarchists...they break shit and cause havoc. Guess who pays for the cops and the damage?? The taxpayer! No wonder Greece is going down the well.
btw, i will add that while i am an anarchist i am in vehement opposition to the actions of many members of the Black Bloc because they are often know to incite riots without any justification which is, in my eyes, contrary to libertarian philosophy.
@m0bi i didn't say all do. notice i said MANY Black Bloc members. i have no problem with Black Blocs that only use violence and rioting in a justified manner (many do), but wtf is, for example, throwing bricks through McDonald's windows going to do? oh, your protesting corporate immorality by fucking up one of the workplaces where the common impoverished person unfortunately has to work in this cruel system? those Black Blocs piss me off. if you want to protest, go to McDonald's corporate...
Violence IS used on us everyday, and if not outright, then the THREAT of violence is always there to keep things as they are. That's why the landscape is saturated with law enforcement.
@m0bi and so you use that as an excuse to perform acts of mindless and non-strategic violence and destruction? so you are a pillager then, no? if you act in an apprehensive manner towards authority figures who blatantly violate your liberty, then i understand, but if it is truly just throwing bricks through McDonald's windows or assaulting random police officers, than i am more than happy to call you a mindless pillager and not a true revolutionary.
And who constitutes as a "random police officer"? They're all part of the same gang, and each has the others back no matter how "corrupt" the others are.
Your ideology keeps our options very limited. One can only fight the enemy AFTER one is attacked?
@m0bi the problem is that your simple mindset you portray right now can't see past the fact that police officers are just people as well. i know a probation officer that is a a socialist and has anarchist tendencies. he does his job because he realizes that if he doesn't, he'll sink in this capitalistic hell hole called America. so would you attack him just because he's wearing a blue uniform if you saw him? isn't that what gangs do? you claim the police are one big gang, right?
Why the fuck would I care if a cop is a socialist (which doesn't impress me anyway) if he still carries out the duties he's supposed to do as a cop?
I do not judge police by how nice they may treat me or not, I treat them by their social position & what they do to maintain it and the class society that we find ourselves entrapped in.
@m0bi it sounds like you have no clue what anarchism is about and would rather just cause havoc. you do realize that anarchism is a form of socialism, right? this police officer i'm speaking of is only a state socialist for semantic purposes. he's a Christian libertarian socialist that believes in anarchism until God comes down to rule. as an atheist i disagree, but it's basically the same principle. regardless, not all cops carry out terrible things and not all are elitists...
Oh, I wasn't aware that there were cops going out of their way to let inmates out of cages, and also refuse to cage other people, and thus providing some real "libertarian" efforts.
@m0bi are you kidding me? so you're telling me you believe that in order to be an anarchist, one must actively break the laws of their country and that if a person instead obeys them, then violence against them is justified, even if their plan is to create change from within the oppressive system? you're no anarchist, you're a petty street thug. no true libertarian would use authority, including the authority of violence, to achieve their goals. violence is only used by a true anarchist...
...in the cases of self-defense and the prevention of further atrocities. violence against a random cop is not self-defense or an action taken to prevent further atrocities.
@m0bi it is wrong to attack innocent people, period. there is nothing "liberatory" about attacking (using the authority of physical force upon) someone who has done nothing. and answer the question: would you attack Noam Chomsky because he works for a school that is the largest contributor to the military industrial complex (MIT)? the point is, if you want to be an anarchist, being a black bloc is fine, but know the politics and philosophy of what you are fighting for or stay the fuck out.
@m0bi i'm not setting rules, i'm suggesting that you have no moral compass if you are willing to incite violence against an innocent person, regardless of their job description (ie, a police officer). and you can heckle people all you want, but saying you would heckle Chomsky shows me that you believe your way (working against the system from the outside only) is the only way. that is very closed minded. lastly, if you know your philosophy, you would oppose any and all forms of authority...
I am well aware that many anarchists disagree on different things, since there is no 'party guidelines' to follow, I don't know if you're aware of that.
As far as morality goes, it's great if you wish to have 'followers' which you may 'lead' to obtain a pure life, but it does us no good in trying to change our material conditions. And I don't think you're even aware of the criticisms I have of Chomsky. Plus, don't tell me I don't know my own philosophy because I don't agree with you.
@ElasticVag i'm well aware of all of this. like i said, i'm more making a judgment call on you as a person. it seems to me by what you speak of that you are more of a petty thug than an anarchist. i then went on to philosophically argue that your philosophy is not libertarian, and i felt that i had a compelling argument.
...when you incite the authority of violence over innocent and unwilling people, that is not libertarian in any way, so obviously you don't know your philosophy. i am not setting rules, i am philosophically dissecting and discarding your idea of anarchism.
Your idea of anarchism is silly and useless to me. The "authority of violence"? Come on! So now we're not even supposed to defend ourselves because "violence" is coercion? Do you think the violence of the slave is the same as the violence of the slave-master? Do you not believe in context? Or that violence in defense of authority is the same as violence in defense of one's self?
@m0bi authority of violence, yes. if you use violence as force against an innocent person, that is authority, which goes directly against libertarianism. i never said self-defense is coercion though. what you are talking about is not self-defense though. assaulting a cop that you cannot objectively say has done something that warrants violence is this authority i am speaking of. self-defense is, for example, assaulting a cop who assaulted or threatened you or another at the RNC...
Well, I'm sorry, you have wrapped yourself in an ideology which you cannot get out of.
You think "authority of violence" is wrong, you ALSO think ONLY cops who beat you are asserting "authority of violence", and that for some reason the others don't use that as a threat constantly. That for some reason the police are IMMUNE to the "authority of violence" when they are the biggest segment of the population that use it on a daily basis.
@m0bi i'm not stupid enough to think all police officers are benevolent and i know better than most about the authority that police officers often use and abuse. i know about the power trip that many if not most cops are on, and i have done some minor studies on the Stanford Prison Study, so i know that when someone becomes a police officer they often become corrupt just because of the position of power they are put in. however, i also know enough cops personally to know that they are not...
You're saying that you do not mind the authorities who do not mess with YOU.
You see nothing 'inherently corrupt' about authority, only authority that interferes in YOUR life. It is ok for a group of people to maintain an obviously abusive and racist system and keep 1% of the population imprisoned, but if they mess with YOU, then by all means, they are tyrants. It doesn't matter if they could or would lock you up as well, it is that because they HAVEN'T then why bother?
@m0bi i'm not saying that at all. you're putting words in my mouth. what i am saying is that i am not going to assume that someone is guilty just because they wear a blue uniform. if i, for example, had knowledge that a police officer had been attacking innocent people and i had the opportunity to prevent him from attacking another person, i would be more than happy to use force in order to stop him. if he was ready to kill someone and that person wasn't a threat to him and i had a gun...
What part of maintaining a prison system, ENFORCING law (and thus authority) onto others without their permission do you not see as authoritative, or coercive? And I'm NOT even talking about the EXCESS abuses, tazering people for no reason, hundreds of homicides, tearing families lives apart, etc. etc. etc.
Why do you defend authority in the name of anarchism?
@m0bi would you attack a fry cook because he is contributing to the wealth of McDonald's? a manager at Walmart? the honest, hardworking boss of a successful sole proprietorship because he has employees? when you attack a police officer for doing his job (which is admittedly, by nature, an authoritative job), you are doing exactly what a soldier does when he goes to war in another country only it is even more immoral because you're actually aware of what you're doing & they are only taking orders
@m0bi no, what you implied was that police officers and soldiers deserve to be attacked by virtue of their job. my point was that it is the system that breeds people to follow an ideology and if anyone deserves to be attacked, it's the politicians. i personally would only use violence in the cases of self-defense and the prevention of further violence in the case that there is a direct and immediate threat, however i have no problem, for example, with the person that assassinates a politician...
...when there is no immediate threat, but a long term threat of further atrocities at the hands of said politician. so, for example, i would have condoned the assassinations of Hitler and Stalin. additionally, i have no problem with violence being used against police officers that are committing violence themselves. if a cop has a history of violence against individuals, i make no judgment call either way. if they are committing violence or threatening it at that moment, i consider counter...
Why do you continue to see police as innocent? You think that somehow they are not at the forefront of enforcing authority, nor protecting the ones that you 'wouldn't mind seeing assassinated'?
Do you really think there are good cops & bad cops?
Ones that shoot people and throw them in prison, & ones that seperately help old ladies across the street?
@m0bi i don't think there are good cops, i know for a fact because a few happen to be close friends and family members. i don't agree with their job choice, but their thinking didn't lead them to make the realizations about politics and economics that you and i have, and indoctrination keeps them from seeing my points when we argue about politics. why blame them for that? it's the system, not them. and some are actually trying to make a difference from the inside. i have no problem with that...
...thinking of all cops as automatically bad is the same as a girl thinking of all guys as dogs that are only looking for sex. it may be true based on their personal experience, but it is far from absolute truth in the grand scheme of things.
...violence to be a positive moral action. however, when someone knows nothing about a police officer and the officer is simply minding his own business, then that is wrong, simple and plain. not all police officers are guilty of malevolence. if you attack an officer by virtue of his job, or a boss of any kind, then you deserve to be punished because it was use who used the authority of force over another individual; it was you who impeded on another's liberty. and as for the fry cook, i was...
Why do you go to great lengths to condemn the "violence" of anarchists, but apologize for the more 'systemic violence' of the police that is practiced on an hourly basis?
@m0bi because i know for a fact that not all police officers partake in the "systemic violence" you speak of, and many actually quit when they finally open their eyes to the "systemic violence" you speak of. this is based on people i actually know. i don't condemn the violence of anarchists though. i condemn the violence of street thugs that try to hide behind the guise of anarchism.
...always crooked bastards by virtue of their job description. for a police officer to act upon someone in a vicious manner, such as what they did at the 2008 RNC, they deserve at least a rebellious backlash. however, if i were a black bloc walking down the street during a protest and i happened to see a police officer minding his own fucking business and i decided to punch him in the face just because he was a cop, that would be inexcusable. if you disagree with this, then you don't deserve...
@m0bi You don't even have one,genius. You don't just attack some random guy! It's common fucking sense that you don't do that! That is what he is trying to tell you! But, he is using a sophisticated vocabulary that maybe you don't understand.
If you believe in unjustified violence and if you don't care about the politics and philosophy, then you AREN'T an anrchist, just another common rioter.
stop accusing others of not really being anarchists. you explicitly defend the state, the police, the prison system, etc. you're philosophy is in direct contradiction to anarchism, stop acting like an authority on the subject. m0bi clearly does have philosophy/politcs. anti-police, anti-prison, anti-capitalist politics. otherwise known as anarchism.
also, your defense of police is the nuremberg defense, di you notice?
@anarcrustie Because anarchy won't fucking work. Any expert on it realizes that. You would need the whole world supporting you, and even then, its only a matter of time before people band together again and start bossing eachother around. Anarchy and socialim DONT WORK.
And you obviously haven't read the argument, as m0bi is condoning random violence against people who he has never met and who haven't provoked him, which is retarded. If you condone that, than you are just a street thug.
@ebrowne369 ok, suffice to say that if the barter system and statelessness are impossible, prehistory never happened.
and i did read the argument, that is an inane strawman which you used then and are now repeating. what m0bi, and most anarchists, argue is that there are no innocent cops. they occupy our neighborhoods armed and assume the right to preemptively kidnap us, we are always justified in attacking them. they have provoked us by their very violent presence.
@anarcrustie But they lock bad people up, someone has to do it. It's pretty simple, don't rob a guys house, murder someone, etc. and they wont "kidnap" you.
...by the same logic, would you be violent against Noam Chomsky because he's a professor at a school that is the main contributor to the Military Industrial Complex? it's the same principle. the cop i know is a cop because he believes in changing things from the inside. if you spoke to him, i guarantee he would change your perspective (of course there's a chance that you are as big of an idiot as you portray yourself through comments, but i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt).
mainly because you do not contribute to society what so ever; you are essentially useless.
also, you believe in something that can not work, and never will be even considered to be implemented.
Finally, because you are a douche bag who doesn't have any friends, internet friends don't count, and blame society for you being an unintelligent failure... enjoy your time working at a record store or playing shitty music for the rest of your life
@pittistheshit86 you are ignorant. you have no clue what you're talking about. i wonder how you know me so well that you can tell me that i have no friends and i'm unintelligent and i'm a douche bag. anarchy has worked in the past, so you're wrong about how it could never work. and i think i do a lot more for society than you do, i work for a better future. you just talk shit on youtube, real cool. seriously though, that was a great argument you presented there.
haha thank you, I thought I presented a good argument, I didn't realize it was great. But seriously, I can tell that you are unintelligent, douche bag, and have no friends just by you being an anarchist. I mean you can't be serious, nor intelligent, if you think it can work. If you really think you are trying to provide a better future by trying to implement anarchy, well then, you are a douche bag, unintelligent, with zero friends and no future.
@pittistheshit86 thank you for repeating everything you said the first time, it really drove the point home. you're just a huge, ignorant tool. probably one of the worst i've ever happened upon. you obviously have no idea what anarchy is or what it's about. you should've at least read up on it before you started talking shit so you could present an argument that was at least the slightest bit valid, even if it was still complete bullshit. but i'm done with this now.
@pittistheshit86 lol i'm an anarchist and i'm also a university student and scholarship football player who is highly sociable and whose best friend is a conservative who i get along with quite well despite our political differences. i'm actually an inspiration to many of the younger generation in my community because i'm one of the few to go to a university and continue with athletics. i'm double majoring in entrepreneurship and accounting and i plan to get a master's...
@pittistheshit86 also, Noam Chomsky, one of the world's leading intellectuals and professor emeritus at MIT, is also an anarchist, so really, just stop lol.
Anarchist-communism was successfully implemented in several parts of Spain during the Spanish Revolution. Also, the Ukranian Free Territory is a pretty good example as well.
Your strawman arguements are pretty weak, and I'd sugget you read up on anarchism before you try to somehow prove it "doesn't work".
okay, seriously, Ukraine? You used Ukraine as an example? What did Ukraine ever do for the world? My argument is weak? You used Ukraine, you have to be kidding. I can provide a few examples of what capitalism gave the world... the internet, TV, cars, movies, iPod, everything.
I said "Ukrainian Free Territory". Look it up. Or, "Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine". Don't criticise what you don't understand. Capitalism isn't a person in a workshop...People are responsible for inventions, not capital.
Again, you have some pretty weak-ass, generic arguements. It's clear you just flat out have no idea what anarchism actually is.
I do know what anarchy is, do you? Do you know what capitalism is? How it works? I don't think you do. And people won't invent stuff without capital. Capital drives innovation. But what has any anarchist society done for us?
@pittistheshit86 read Gaston Leval's account of collectivization during anarchist Spain and you will see that the assertion that "people won't invent stuff without capital" is completely baseless. for one, people quite often "invent stuff" not because they know they will make money off of it, but because they are for the progress of humanity. and if you think that incentive is necessary to get people to invent stuff, that is why many anarchists believe in the labor theory of value.
Apparently, you have no idea what anarchists stand for, and you're not even willing to try to understand. You asked me for successful examples of anarchism in practice; I gave you them. Capital doesn't drive innovation, survival of the human race drives innovation. Anarchist societies have proven that people can organize free societies without hierarchy; without the state, the church, and capitalism. Except for exploiting your time, energy, and labor, what has capitalism done for you?
@punk Yup, survival would drive innovation, innovation to survive, not to make life better. Well, instead of telling you what capitalism gave me, I will tell you what it gave you... Your computer, your internet, your cell phone, all of your appliances in your house, your car, the websites you use to read about anarchism, gas in your car, heat and A/C in your house. Anarchy is great, in theory. But capitalism is proven to work. Why do you think the standard of living is much greater in the US?
They just destroyed the property of sweatshop using corporations, companies financing a government that starts irrational wars(and spies on its citizens), and the government itself.
And even if you total up the number of deaths that anarchists are responsible for since the set of ideas emerged in the 1850's, the Republican party is still responsible for the death of more people in the last century.
You have the freedom to assemble--not to destroy someone else property. There was a little more to it for the dolts involved in the Boston Tea Party. One act against a company is a different story, but not an innocent one(s) who are no way directly involved with tea or the war in Iraq.
Why do you have to be directly involved to be pissed off? I don't understand this logic. The system needs to be destroyed by the workers of the world whether they're directly involved or not. Fuck your property. Property is just a word.
i love how cops cant run you over :) cant touch dis mutha fucka! take us seriously! hear our words or get the fuck outa here!
dethbypotato 1 day ago
Are there any real anarchists left? Or are they just a bunch of pussy college hipsters that couldn't knock over a house of cards with a sledge hammer...
TheVisionary84 1 week ago
mane i is tired of all des capitalist craKKKa fake ass honkys. all dey does is tryin ta promote da white ppl cauz. no boarders, no states, no banks, no police, no taxes, free healthcare, free houses, free water, free food, no laws, minority reprimanding, free electricity, free school(optional), free clothes is be da only way america will ever be worth a damn wit all des white conservatives america aint worth a shit.
dculp39231 4 weeks ago
These were the good old days, when not having a job was the last thing violent protesters would protest.
I guess you don't know what you've got til it's gone.
DecimusIunius 1 month ago
Anarchists FTW.
wowamonn 3 months ago 7
Losers!
Mikemartin2000MM 3 months ago
@SIGN666 So you think that just because you attended a protest and read something off the internet you are "liberated" and "free"? Grow up, douche. Your'e probably a fucking hippie who went to a community college, which "changed everything". For all we know, YOU are being indoctrinated by some anarchists to cause civil unrest. But the most likely truth is you just read something stupid off the internet or like smashing windows.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
Anarchists are the most miserable people in the world. I knew them in high school. Dressed in all black and alone. Some ended up homeless or in prison.
METALBUG999 4 months ago
@METALBUG999 You knew all the anarchists did you? Good for you lad.
Redstar226 4 months ago
usually i hate these types of people, but the US actually needs em
bmfadam 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
agent provocateurs all of them >thay take over real movements to shit on other peoples demonstrations and make a violent element to give the excuse of danger to justify goverments war on free speach with police and military presence and preventing the voice of all and discrediting movements...Problem reation solution and or FALSE FLAG and label domestic terrorist
TheWahbulance 4 months ago
WTF ? Fuck the US ok FIGHT THE SYSTEM ANARCHY!!!!
xXAskingRebirthXx 5 months ago
KEEP FIGHTIN' US!!!
MatsuSansei 5 months ago
Comment removed
TheReaperBrandon 8 months ago
Whats the song?
The1979Warriors 10 months ago
Ⓐ = Jävla
64TbirdLandau 10 months ago
I don't think this is Anarchism. This is a response from repressed people. Working within the system to fundamentally change the system is hopeless, the government is in power to perpetuate its own interests.
Monetarism is a morally bankrupted system. REVOLT>>REVOLUTION!
toknowandgrow 10 months ago
in my opinion, anarchy will only work if nearly 100% of the world population wants it and they all know they want it. even in that event, it will only be a matter of time before people start banding together for protection, and then these groups will merge, eventually making factions and nations, and one of the people will be bound to take charge, ending the anarchy. over all, anarchy is good for reform, but will never last.
ebrowne369 11 months ago
@ebrowne369
Hence the need for another revolution. I agree with you 100% by the way.
b3rtne 7 months ago
@b3rtne Exactly. These guys aren't anarchists, they are revolutionists.
ebrowne369 7 months ago
@ebrowne369
They're revolutionists in the name of Anarchy.
b3rtne 7 months ago
@b3rtne But they aren't anarchists or protesting in the name of anarchy. They don't want the abolishing of order, they just want huge economic reforms and a change to a mix of socialism and democracy. They still want order, therefore should not label themselves anarchists.
ebrowne369 7 months ago
@ebrowne369
Since when has anarchy meant disorder? Why can't there be order without the state?
b3rtne 7 months ago
@b3rtne Without a state, it descends into chaos. You will not have the ability to control anything, and the worst in people will come out when food runs short (money will become worthless, so people will quit their jobs and the industry would collapse). It will be chaos, you need a structure and order to keep people in line. Look at Somalia. The revolution and anarchy came, but then it was complete chaos and now it is a shit hole.
ebrowne369 7 months ago
@ebrowne369
Money would be just as worthless as it is now. The only reason it's worth anything is because the state assigns value to it. Why wouldn't we be able to assign the same value? Would people quit their jobs? Yeah, probably. But that's on them. I don't think much would change as long as everyone kept a level head and realized that we don't need an oppressive owner controlling our every move. Although, people aren't rational or intelligent enough to allow that.
b3rtne 7 months ago
@b3rtne You wouldn't be able to assign value because you need a state and treasury. People would just go to bartering, which doesn't work. A lot of things would change, we need an organized structure in order to maintain society and not have chaos.
ebrowne369 7 months ago
@ebrowne369 bartering doesn't work? what?
anarcrustie 4 months ago
@anarcrustie There is a reason why people stopped bartering. Money is a good way to measure out all the items, its the perfect ratio. And there can still be injustice with bartering, just more so in the form of material items rather than cash and cheques.
ebrowne369 4 months ago
@ebrowne369 personally i like bartering better than money but prefer neither, a gift economy.
but regardless, bartering clearly "works" fine, its probably been used more throughout history than any other system.
in regards to the general above conversation, these kids are totally anarchists insofar as they believe in stateless socialism. that is what they are fighting for, whether you aggree or disagree.
anarcrustie 4 months ago
@anarcrustie That's just you agreeing. They were smashing windows and yelling abuse at police, nothing political about that. Anarchy isn't necessarily stateless socialism, and stateless socialism wouldn't work.
ebrowne369 4 months ago
@ebrowne369 what? saying this is not political is ignorant as all hell. every attack is targeted: they attack banks, multinational corporations, and the police, because they are anti-capitalist and anti-state. this seems pretty obvious, actually.
did you see the image of the red and black flag with "direct action against capitalism" written on it?
that explains the whole situation pretty simply.
anarcrustie 3 months ago
@anarcrustie Yeah, but there is nothing clever about what they are doing. That is what I was trying to say.
Regardless of their cause, actions such as smashing windows and yelling abuse at officers will not achieve much regarding political change. The anarchist movement either has to up the ante and become genuine, off-the-grid guerillas, or become legitimate politicians and move to washington. Otherwise, the anarchist movement will be nothing but a bunch of vandals, kids and hippies.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
@ebrowne369 there is a reasonable middle ground between congress and guerrilla warfare.
mass insurrections have been central to many revolutions in history, from 1789 to 1917 to the arab spring. admitedly they won't get far with only a handful of people, but when great numbers of people get organized enough to take over the streets, confront the police, etc, usually some kings are gonna get beheaded before they are through.
anarcrustie 3 months ago
@anarcrustie Define "take over the streets". Doing a sit-in will result in you getting dragged out manually. Abusing an officer in a confrontation will just get you beat with a baton and arrested. I didn't mean congress literally, what I meant was improve your image and become legitimate. But what they are doing now will never work, especially if you go around smashing windows, doing graffiti and alienating yourself from the average citizen.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
@ebrowne369 taking over the streets means holding the streets whether the police like it or not, and eventually defeating the police entirely. it means throwing back tear-gas cans, building and defending barricades, snatching back any who are arrested, breaking police lines, and, ultimately, this:
/watch?v=Jrx49tfrfJk&feature=related
anarcrustie 3 months ago
@SIGN666 zero at the moment. i am a solo-practitioner although at time i have had people work for me. but i don't see why that is relevant.
xekul 1 year ago
@SIGN666 im self-employed so i am my boss. so in that sense giving hand jobs to my boss would be the same as jerking off. and any man who says they have never jerked off is a fool or a liar. also, i never watch fox news if i can help it.
xekul 1 year ago
@SIGN666 must be hard having your bung-hole gang-raped in the holding cell every time you get arrested at one of these little anarchist brick throwing parties. you might be better off staying in moms basement and sniffing model airplane glue. then again, you are a self-described "anarcho-communist" which is synonymous with "complete idiot", so keep bashing those windows and watch out for your corn hole... tool.
xekul 1 year ago
@SIGN666 stop huffing paint in your moms basement and grow up
xekul 1 year ago
@SIGN666 but anarchists are patriots of the cause of anarchism!
TheJames1233 1 year ago
Nice Vid, man!
Alert alerta
ChiefofMasterPlan 1 year ago
Democratic Socialism ftw!
QUE VIVA ALLENDE!
DerPunkfreundGER 1 year ago
@DerPunkfreundGER democratic socialism for the getting deposed by the cia?
anarcrustie 3 months ago
xekul
You're an idiot, haven't you heard of noam choamsky, he is one of the most cited PHD in the world for his work in linguistics. He is also an anarchists. FUCK the RNC, fuck imperialist american assholes, FUCK CAPITALISM. Long live anarcho-communism
asnazarov 1 year ago
you fucking "anarchists" are such a joke. a bunch of skinny fucks with daddy issues who think its fun to put on a mask and pitch a brick through a window. notice you don't see any "anarchists" over age 25, most are in their late teens and early 20s. thats because at some point most people just grow the fuck up and get a job.
xekul 1 year ago
Totally awesome music and video:-)
Fuck the gov
(A) :-)
SuperAcab666 1 year ago
You are the very reason the cops acted like that you libarel faggots
bkbigel 1 year ago
hahaha american anarchists xD and i thought the world couldnt get any more fucked up
xxxMRXXXxxx 1 year ago
@SIGN666 No patriots?What do you call protesters?
MrSafetymeeting 1 year ago
riot summer 2010
blackmesa10 1 year ago
Keep fighting
blackmesa10 1 year ago
bella ciao!
THEcontinanza 1 year ago
Damn anarchists...they break shit and cause havoc. Guess who pays for the cops and the damage?? The taxpayer! No wonder Greece is going down the well.
jmartinez318 1 year ago
The song is a cover of bella ciao done by me and a drum machine.
solidaridadobre 2 years ago 4
@solidaridadobre i like the cover ! :)
ichda2 1 year ago
btw, i will add that while i am an anarchist i am in vehement opposition to the actions of many members of the Black Bloc because they are often know to incite riots without any justification which is, in my eyes, contrary to libertarian philosophy.
eboyd32 2 years ago
Without any justification?
Really?
And I'm sorry if our social conflict gets in the way of your philosophy.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi i didn't say all do. notice i said MANY Black Bloc members. i have no problem with Black Blocs that only use violence and rioting in a justified manner (many do), but wtf is, for example, throwing bricks through McDonald's windows going to do? oh, your protesting corporate immorality by fucking up one of the workplaces where the common impoverished person unfortunately has to work in this cruel system? those Black Blocs piss me off. if you want to protest, go to McDonald's corporate...
eboyd32 1 year ago
...and lead a peaceful protest, only using violence if it is used upon you. that's all i'm saying.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Violence IS used on us everyday, and if not outright, then the THREAT of violence is always there to keep things as they are. That's why the landscape is saturated with law enforcement.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi and so you use that as an excuse to perform acts of mindless and non-strategic violence and destruction? so you are a pillager then, no? if you act in an apprehensive manner towards authority figures who blatantly violate your liberty, then i understand, but if it is truly just throwing bricks through McDonald's windows or assaulting random police officers, than i am more than happy to call you a mindless pillager and not a true revolutionary.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Call me whatever you want, I don't care.
And who constitutes as a "random police officer"? They're all part of the same gang, and each has the others back no matter how "corrupt" the others are.
Your ideology keeps our options very limited. One can only fight the enemy AFTER one is attacked?
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi the problem is that your simple mindset you portray right now can't see past the fact that police officers are just people as well. i know a probation officer that is a a socialist and has anarchist tendencies. he does his job because he realizes that if he doesn't, he'll sink in this capitalistic hell hole called America. so would you attack him just because he's wearing a blue uniform if you saw him? isn't that what gangs do? you claim the police are one big gang, right?
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Why the fuck would I care if a cop is a socialist (which doesn't impress me anyway) if he still carries out the duties he's supposed to do as a cop?
I do not judge police by how nice they may treat me or not, I treat them by their social position & what they do to maintain it and the class society that we find ourselves entrapped in.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi it sounds like you have no clue what anarchism is about and would rather just cause havoc. you do realize that anarchism is a form of socialism, right? this police officer i'm speaking of is only a state socialist for semantic purposes. he's a Christian libertarian socialist that believes in anarchism until God comes down to rule. as an atheist i disagree, but it's basically the same principle. regardless, not all cops carry out terrible things and not all are elitists...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Oh, I wasn't aware that there were cops going out of their way to let inmates out of cages, and also refuse to cage other people, and thus providing some real "libertarian" efforts.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi are you kidding me? so you're telling me you believe that in order to be an anarchist, one must actively break the laws of their country and that if a person instead obeys them, then violence against them is justified, even if their plan is to create change from within the oppressive system? you're no anarchist, you're a petty street thug. no true libertarian would use authority, including the authority of violence, to achieve their goals. violence is only used by a true anarchist...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Oh my god. 1st of all, I am not a "political activist". I don't care about your fucking PC rules about how to engage in the political system.
I am an anarchist, I am against authority, which means, against throwing people in cages, how hard is it to fucking understand that?
I don't care about "good" cops, or "bad" cops, they all perform the same function which is - "law enforcement". What is so "liberatory" about that?
m0bi 1 year ago
...in the cases of self-defense and the prevention of further atrocities. violence against a random cop is not self-defense or an action taken to prevent further atrocities.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
So if we can't defend ourselves from authority, what use of it is there to be an anarchist anyway?
What's the use of wanting to live our lives on our own terms if we must always submit to those who use violence, or the threat thereof against us?
I don't see resignation or submission to be appealing to me, but if you prefer that, as well as your political games, then go ahead.
But don't expect the rest of us to do as you do.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi it is wrong to attack innocent people, period. there is nothing "liberatory" about attacking (using the authority of physical force upon) someone who has done nothing. and answer the question: would you attack Noam Chomsky because he works for a school that is the largest contributor to the military industrial complex (MIT)? the point is, if you want to be an anarchist, being a black bloc is fine, but know the politics and philosophy of what you are fighting for or stay the fuck out.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
I didn't say anything about attacking innocent people!
No, I wouldn't attack Noam Chomsky, but I'd heckle the shit out of him.
Oh and please, stop giving people rules for if they "want to be an anarchist".
I know my philosophy, you don't.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi i'm not setting rules, i'm suggesting that you have no moral compass if you are willing to incite violence against an innocent person, regardless of their job description (ie, a police officer). and you can heckle people all you want, but saying you would heckle Chomsky shows me that you believe your way (working against the system from the outside only) is the only way. that is very closed minded. lastly, if you know your philosophy, you would oppose any and all forms of authority...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
I am well aware that many anarchists disagree on different things, since there is no 'party guidelines' to follow, I don't know if you're aware of that.
As far as morality goes, it's great if you wish to have 'followers' which you may 'lead' to obtain a pure life, but it does us no good in trying to change our material conditions. And I don't think you're even aware of the criticisms I have of Chomsky. Plus, don't tell me I don't know my own philosophy because I don't agree with you.
ElasticVag 1 year ago
@ElasticVag i'm well aware of all of this. like i said, i'm more making a judgment call on you as a person. it seems to me by what you speak of that you are more of a petty thug than an anarchist. i then went on to philosophically argue that your philosophy is not libertarian, and i felt that i had a compelling argument.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Oh, by the way, this is m0bi, my friend left their account on and I fergot to sign in.
ElasticVag 1 year ago
...when you incite the authority of violence over innocent and unwilling people, that is not libertarian in any way, so obviously you don't know your philosophy. i am not setting rules, i am philosophically dissecting and discarding your idea of anarchism.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Your idea of anarchism is silly and useless to me. The "authority of violence"? Come on! So now we're not even supposed to defend ourselves because "violence" is coercion? Do you think the violence of the slave is the same as the violence of the slave-master? Do you not believe in context? Or that violence in defense of authority is the same as violence in defense of one's self?
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi authority of violence, yes. if you use violence as force against an innocent person, that is authority, which goes directly against libertarianism. i never said self-defense is coercion though. what you are talking about is not self-defense though. assaulting a cop that you cannot objectively say has done something that warrants violence is this authority i am speaking of. self-defense is, for example, assaulting a cop who assaulted or threatened you or another at the RNC...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Well, I'm sorry, you have wrapped yourself in an ideology which you cannot get out of.
You think "authority of violence" is wrong, you ALSO think ONLY cops who beat you are asserting "authority of violence", and that for some reason the others don't use that as a threat constantly. That for some reason the police are IMMUNE to the "authority of violence" when they are the biggest segment of the population that use it on a daily basis.
Good luck, but your ideology is beyond repair.
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi i'm not stupid enough to think all police officers are benevolent and i know better than most about the authority that police officers often use and abuse. i know about the power trip that many if not most cops are on, and i have done some minor studies on the Stanford Prison Study, so i know that when someone becomes a police officer they often become corrupt just because of the position of power they are put in. however, i also know enough cops personally to know that they are not...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
You're saying that you do not mind the authorities who do not mess with YOU.
You see nothing 'inherently corrupt' about authority, only authority that interferes in YOUR life. It is ok for a group of people to maintain an obviously abusive and racist system and keep 1% of the population imprisoned, but if they mess with YOU, then by all means, they are tyrants. It doesn't matter if they could or would lock you up as well, it is that because they HAVEN'T then why bother?
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi i'm not saying that at all. you're putting words in my mouth. what i am saying is that i am not going to assume that someone is guilty just because they wear a blue uniform. if i, for example, had knowledge that a police officer had been attacking innocent people and i had the opportunity to prevent him from attacking another person, i would be more than happy to use force in order to stop him. if he was ready to kill someone and that person wasn't a threat to him and i had a gun...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
What part of maintaining a prison system, ENFORCING law (and thus authority) onto others without their permission do you not see as authoritative, or coercive? And I'm NOT even talking about the EXCESS abuses, tazering people for no reason, hundreds of homicides, tearing families lives apart, etc. etc. etc.
Why do you defend authority in the name of anarchism?
That just perplexes me...
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi would you attack a fry cook because he is contributing to the wealth of McDonald's? a manager at Walmart? the honest, hardworking boss of a successful sole proprietorship because he has employees? when you attack a police officer for doing his job (which is admittedly, by nature, an authoritative job), you are doing exactly what a soldier does when he goes to war in another country only it is even more immoral because you're actually aware of what you're doing & they are only taking orders
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Yeah, soldiers and cops don't know what they're doing...
They become absolved of personal responsibility when they attack people...
But if working people attack cops or soldiers, then they are just authoritative bastards...
Ok, whatever.
Nice way to skirt around what I was saying.
Like I said, have fun with your ideology, oh, but could you please not call it anarchism...
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi no, what you implied was that police officers and soldiers deserve to be attacked by virtue of their job. my point was that it is the system that breeds people to follow an ideology and if anyone deserves to be attacked, it's the politicians. i personally would only use violence in the cases of self-defense and the prevention of further violence in the case that there is a direct and immediate threat, however i have no problem, for example, with the person that assassinates a politician...
eboyd32 1 year ago
...when there is no immediate threat, but a long term threat of further atrocities at the hands of said politician. so, for example, i would have condoned the assassinations of Hitler and Stalin. additionally, i have no problem with violence being used against police officers that are committing violence themselves. if a cop has a history of violence against individuals, i make no judgment call either way. if they are committing violence or threatening it at that moment, i consider counter...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Why do you continue to see police as innocent? You think that somehow they are not at the forefront of enforcing authority, nor protecting the ones that you 'wouldn't mind seeing assassinated'?
Do you really think there are good cops & bad cops?
Ones that shoot people and throw them in prison, & ones that seperately help old ladies across the street?
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi i don't think there are good cops, i know for a fact because a few happen to be close friends and family members. i don't agree with their job choice, but their thinking didn't lead them to make the realizations about politics and economics that you and i have, and indoctrination keeps them from seeing my points when we argue about politics. why blame them for that? it's the system, not them. and some are actually trying to make a difference from the inside. i have no problem with that...
eboyd32 1 year ago
...thinking of all cops as automatically bad is the same as a girl thinking of all guys as dogs that are only looking for sex. it may be true based on their personal experience, but it is far from absolute truth in the grand scheme of things.
eboyd32 1 year ago
...violence to be a positive moral action. however, when someone knows nothing about a police officer and the officer is simply minding his own business, then that is wrong, simple and plain. not all police officers are guilty of malevolence. if you attack an officer by virtue of his job, or a boss of any kind, then you deserve to be punished because it was use who used the authority of force over another individual; it was you who impeded on another's liberty. and as for the fry cook, i was...
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Why do you go to great lengths to condemn the "violence" of anarchists, but apologize for the more 'systemic violence' of the police that is practiced on an hourly basis?
m0bi 1 year ago
@m0bi because i know for a fact that not all police officers partake in the "systemic violence" you speak of, and many actually quit when they finally open their eyes to the "systemic violence" you speak of. this is based on people i actually know. i don't condemn the violence of anarchists though. i condemn the violence of street thugs that try to hide behind the guise of anarchism.
eboyd32 1 year ago
...speaking of him or her as someone that perpetuates the machine of a giant corporation.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@eboyd32
Also, please don't compare fry cooks to bosses, cops, or soldiers, as it makes you appear silly....
m0bi 1 year ago
...best believe i'd shoot first.
eboyd32 1 year ago
...always crooked bastards by virtue of their job description. for a police officer to act upon someone in a vicious manner, such as what they did at the 2008 RNC, they deserve at least a rebellious backlash. however, if i were a black bloc walking down the street during a protest and i happened to see a police officer minding his own fucking business and i decided to punch him in the face just because he was a cop, that would be inexcusable. if you disagree with this, then you don't deserve...
eboyd32 1 year ago
...to consider yourself an anarchist as far as i'm concerned.
eboyd32 1 year ago
@m0bi You don't even have one,genius. You don't just attack some random guy! It's common fucking sense that you don't do that! That is what he is trying to tell you! But, he is using a sophisticated vocabulary that maybe you don't understand.
If you believe in unjustified violence and if you don't care about the politics and philosophy, then you AREN'T an anrchist, just another common rioter.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
@ebrowne369 (in response to comment against m0bi)
stop accusing others of not really being anarchists. you explicitly defend the state, the police, the prison system, etc. you're philosophy is in direct contradiction to anarchism, stop acting like an authority on the subject. m0bi clearly does have philosophy/politcs. anti-police, anti-prison, anti-capitalist politics. otherwise known as anarchism.
also, your defense of police is the nuremberg defense, di you notice?
anarcrustie 3 months ago
@anarcrustie Because anarchy won't fucking work. Any expert on it realizes that. You would need the whole world supporting you, and even then, its only a matter of time before people band together again and start bossing eachother around. Anarchy and socialim DONT WORK.
And you obviously haven't read the argument, as m0bi is condoning random violence against people who he has never met and who haven't provoked him, which is retarded. If you condone that, than you are just a street thug.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
@ebrowne369 ok, suffice to say that if the barter system and statelessness are impossible, prehistory never happened.
and i did read the argument, that is an inane strawman which you used then and are now repeating. what m0bi, and most anarchists, argue is that there are no innocent cops. they occupy our neighborhoods armed and assume the right to preemptively kidnap us, we are always justified in attacking them. they have provoked us by their very violent presence.
anarcrustie 3 months ago 4
@anarcrustie But they lock bad people up, someone has to do it. It's pretty simple, don't rob a guys house, murder someone, etc. and they wont "kidnap" you.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
@m0bi You wouldn't be complaining if that "caged" inmate stole your TV or raped your wife.
ebrowne369 3 months ago
...by the same logic, would you be violent against Noam Chomsky because he's a professor at a school that is the main contributor to the Military Industrial Complex? it's the same principle. the cop i know is a cop because he believes in changing things from the inside. if you spoke to him, i guarantee he would change your perspective (of course there's a chance that you are as big of an idiot as you portray yourself through comments, but i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt).
eboyd32 1 year ago
what song is this?
rockerlrf 2 years ago
No religion,and no more asshole Managers and bosses.
RiseAgianst88 2 years ago
if you are an anarchist, do society a favor and kill yourselves
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 I guess I should since a guy on youtube name pit tis the shit 86 told me to.
soundcheck127 2 years ago
it's pitt is the shit... dumb ass
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 why, exactly, should i kill myself for being an anarchist?
camrayment 2 years ago
mainly because you do not contribute to society what so ever; you are essentially useless.
also, you believe in something that can not work, and never will be even considered to be implemented.
Finally, because you are a douche bag who doesn't have any friends, internet friends don't count, and blame society for you being an unintelligent failure... enjoy your time working at a record store or playing shitty music for the rest of your life
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 you are ignorant. you have no clue what you're talking about. i wonder how you know me so well that you can tell me that i have no friends and i'm unintelligent and i'm a douche bag. anarchy has worked in the past, so you're wrong about how it could never work. and i think i do a lot more for society than you do, i work for a better future. you just talk shit on youtube, real cool. seriously though, that was a great argument you presented there.
camrayment 2 years ago
haha thank you, I thought I presented a good argument, I didn't realize it was great. But seriously, I can tell that you are unintelligent, douche bag, and have no friends just by you being an anarchist. I mean you can't be serious, nor intelligent, if you think it can work. If you really think you are trying to provide a better future by trying to implement anarchy, well then, you are a douche bag, unintelligent, with zero friends and no future.
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 thank you for repeating everything you said the first time, it really drove the point home. you're just a huge, ignorant tool. probably one of the worst i've ever happened upon. you obviously have no idea what anarchy is or what it's about. you should've at least read up on it before you started talking shit so you could present an argument that was at least the slightest bit valid, even if it was still complete bullshit. but i'm done with this now.
camrayment 2 years ago
dont let em get under your skin they will see how wrong they really are pretty soon. these black bloc amateurs lmao
TheAngelofvengance 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 lol i'm an anarchist and i'm also a university student and scholarship football player who is highly sociable and whose best friend is a conservative who i get along with quite well despite our political differences. i'm actually an inspiration to many of the younger generation in my community because i'm one of the few to go to a university and continue with athletics. i'm double majoring in entrepreneurship and accounting and i plan to get a master's...
eboyd32 2 years ago
...i'm also a near straight A student, so obviously every single one of you assumptions and ad hominem attacks are completely baseless and hilarious.
eboyd32 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 also, Noam Chomsky, one of the world's leading intellectuals and professor emeritus at MIT, is also an anarchist, so really, just stop lol.
eboyd32 2 years ago
Anarchist-communism was successfully implemented in several parts of Spain during the Spanish Revolution. Also, the Ukranian Free Territory is a pretty good example as well.
Your strawman arguements are pretty weak, and I'd sugget you read up on anarchism before you try to somehow prove it "doesn't work".
PunkSkaOi 2 years ago
@punk
okay, seriously, Ukraine? You used Ukraine as an example? What did Ukraine ever do for the world? My argument is weak? You used Ukraine, you have to be kidding. I can provide a few examples of what capitalism gave the world... the internet, TV, cars, movies, iPod, everything.
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
I said "Ukrainian Free Territory". Look it up. Or, "Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine". Don't criticise what you don't understand. Capitalism isn't a person in a workshop...People are responsible for inventions, not capital.
Again, you have some pretty weak-ass, generic arguements. It's clear you just flat out have no idea what anarchism actually is.
PunkSkaOi 2 years ago
@punk
I do know what anarchy is, do you? Do you know what capitalism is? How it works? I don't think you do. And people won't invent stuff without capital. Capital drives innovation. But what has any anarchist society done for us?
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
@pittistheshit86 read Gaston Leval's account of collectivization during anarchist Spain and you will see that the assertion that "people won't invent stuff without capital" is completely baseless. for one, people quite often "invent stuff" not because they know they will make money off of it, but because they are for the progress of humanity. and if you think that incentive is necessary to get people to invent stuff, that is why many anarchists believe in the labor theory of value.
eboyd32 2 years ago
Apparently, you have no idea what anarchists stand for, and you're not even willing to try to understand. You asked me for successful examples of anarchism in practice; I gave you them. Capital doesn't drive innovation, survival of the human race drives innovation. Anarchist societies have proven that people can organize free societies without hierarchy; without the state, the church, and capitalism. Except for exploiting your time, energy, and labor, what has capitalism done for you?
PunkSkaOi 2 years ago
@punk Yup, survival would drive innovation, innovation to survive, not to make life better. Well, instead of telling you what capitalism gave me, I will tell you what it gave you... Your computer, your internet, your cell phone, all of your appliances in your house, your car, the websites you use to read about anarchism, gas in your car, heat and A/C in your house. Anarchy is great, in theory. But capitalism is proven to work. Why do you think the standard of living is much greater in the US?
pittistheshit86 2 years ago
proud Anarchist, and a fucking punk, FUCK ORDER!
kleinkopffff 2 years ago
I respect the youngsters meanings.
Anarchism prevails.
Khassedeus 2 years ago 4
who's this doing bella ciao?
nmDeeley 2 years ago
Anarchy! Anarchy! I don't know what is means but I like it! Anarchy!
Ahh...movie quotes are quite handy.
85mrgardner 2 years ago
Ha. NWO Revolutionary War reenactors pretending they have some kind of movement by claiming anti-capitalist actions as their own.
ManoftheBeret 2 years ago
(A) forever !
NewsIF 2 years ago 10
Get your capitalist sympathizing ass out of here and fuck your "new republic".
toiletsrus 2 years ago
That s good have still some american who are not blind! In Europe, in Africa, in America, anarchy rules!
We will keep destroying all your fucking capitalist symbols batstards!
kikujiro71 2 years ago 2
Fuck capitalism!!!
skinisskin 2 years ago
Oh good lord! Those anarchists are so violent!
They just destroyed the property of sweatshop using corporations, companies financing a government that starts irrational wars(and spies on its citizens), and the government itself.
And even if you total up the number of deaths that anarchists are responsible for since the set of ideas emerged in the 1850's, the Republican party is still responsible for the death of more people in the last century.
Who's more violent?
MississippiMosher 2 years ago
Amen.
toiletsrus 2 years ago
ahahahah ONORE AI PARTIGIANI ORA E SEMPRE RESISTENZA!!! fa trp ridere in inglese bella ciao xD
n00b159 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck anarchists and fuck for what they stand for some mother fuckers dont ever come back to st paul
degidio13 2 years ago
Oh we'll be back. And hopefully you're the one forced out next time.
toiletsrus 2 years ago
You have the freedom to assemble--not to destroy someone else property. There was a little more to it for the dolts involved in the Boston Tea Party. One act against a company is a different story, but not an innocent one(s) who are no way directly involved with tea or the war in Iraq.
coasterfreak100 3 years ago
Why do you have to be directly involved to be pissed off? I don't understand this logic. The system needs to be destroyed by the workers of the world whether they're directly involved or not. Fuck your property. Property is just a word.
toiletsrus 2 years ago 3
I never understood people who want to take advantage of assembly, only to destroy other peoples property and be a punch of morons.
coasterfreak100 3 years ago
yeah, like those dolts at the Boston Tea Party.
SgtSanchez 3 years ago 4
Not really sure, I had to go to the ends of the internet to even find pictures from the RNC
solidaridadobre 3 years ago
where did you get the picture at 1:06?
fortifived 3 years ago