Look into the Venus Project, this is the same stuff with main priniciples of anti money and pro technology. it is basically modern day scientific anarcho communism, thro they do not use that name.
Also, a stateless society, is, indeed, anarchism. LACK OF POLITICAL HIERARCHY at all levels, and absence of a SINGLE RULER (i.e. state, or figurehead, or monarch), in favour of the INDIVIDUAL ruling the INDIVIDUAL.
PEOPLE'S INTERESTS COMING INTO CONFLICT IS A FACT OF LIFE. IF YOU WISH TO HAVE A COMPLETELY FREE SOCIETY, YOU CANNOT IMPOSE LAWS LIMITING RIGHTS. TO DO SO IS ANTITHETICAL TO YOUR SUPPOSED VIEWPOINT. Do you want a communist state, or are you arguing for a libertarian capitalist system? It is VERY hard to tell what, in fact, you belive.
"I inherently do not have faith in human nature." Isn't 'human nature' the basis of a society without coercion? anarcho-syndicalism seeks foremost to allow the inherent creative nature of persons be expressed. Without the 'order' of nature, this sounds like third-way liberalism, especially without settling radical sovereignty of the individual (the very basis of anarchism) in conflict with private property. Such conflicts are the black-boxing that Bookchin to Chomsky relegate in 'nature.'
Jack, it is necessary for people to realize their connection to earth and to eachother scientifically. I used to be a non-theist just unconcerned but now I am an atheist because I want to help people emancipate themselves from religion and really start to take "Personal Responsibility" for actions.
People naturally seek alliances. They can also be very altruistic. People can reach agreements and share. They have been doing it ever since the Pleistocene without force, but with genuine desire. It is impossible to continue the way were going.....we'll blow eachother up eventually by not sharing resources. Nobody will ever be forced to share. People must have the freedom to participate or not.
May I suggest "The Conquest of Bread", "AnarchoSyndicalism",and "God and The State" for starters. Capitalists really can't be anarchists they are instead minarchists.
I'm pretty much a new anarchist here. I am leaning over to the sydicalist side. I have read Marx of course b/c I was a socialist before. I just finished with "God and the State". I see myself as an individual but feel good about moving with people. Good video-btw
i dont understand how one can lean left and be an anarchist... how can spreading the wealth work without force? what if someone does not want to share?
Apparantly you know absolutely nothing about anarchy and socialism. Some people can be experts about a subject without ever having to pick up a book. All they need is to be told. I mean why in the hell would anybody pick a system of control? Its money less and decentralized, please pick up a book or read one online. Its only 150 years in the making.
oh wise one, please enlighten me with your knowledge...i had thought that 'collectivist anarchists' like yourself know about philosophy, but i guess the socratic method is not their way.
Let's say someone doesn't want to participate in the collectivization of private property (factories, farms etc.) They can have their own business/farm but no can work for them. (wage slavery) This was applied in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War and worked fine.
Once people see how much better things are working in a democratic, non-hierarchical workplace no one would want to sell their labor power to a boss anymore. You don't see African Americans selling their liberty to Plantation owners anymore, because no sane person, if given the choice, would do so. Another thing, when you start to force people to do things that are not necessarily infringing on the rights of others, you get closer and closer to despotism and genocide.
dude, no disrespect but, i thought u would already be aware of the problems with the democratic process.
i dont understand how people can be against capitalism, its just person A and person B trading good X and good Y as they both gain utility. no violence. no force. nothing immoral.
but i guess, im okay with whatever you believe as long as you don't force me to be apart of it...
Wonderful video, I like how it was put together. I can see how your thoughts were hard to communicate all at once. Either way, it made me think.
I am looking at anarchy as my basic political philosophy. Right now, I am now still in this phase of being an American republican. It's hard to think outside that box.
I really think that liberatarianism is about as close as humankind may ever get to being a stateless, anarchistic society. Humans like to be protected and that calls for...
at the very least allowing gun ownership and at the very most having a standing army. And humans like to have a safety net (like monetary security) and those ideas create many problems. Since I changed careers AND been married, my tax bill has increased almost 5 times. That alone should make any reasonable human blow a gasket.
One thing I still agree is how an anarchist can be a teacher. Another anarchist informed me that being a teacher is just a profession, as long as you don't cross any...
violate any previously defined boundaries. I disagree because teachers must maintain order in a classroom on a daily basis and that creates a contradiction, or even an irony. Just try to keep a bunch of hormonal, rebellious teens in their seats during the spring. I don't power trip over my students, but I don't hide my disdain for certain rule violations.
Sorry for going tangential, but your video inspired to do so.
cont 2. Moreover, when people are educated to critical consciousness, then we will have a radical democracy, which is like your anarchist ideas.
As a student of critical pedagogy, I believe that goal of critical consciousness or enlightened citizenry can be achieved if the masses will ed it. But, as you know we are sucked into materialism and self-interest by the corporate media who want us to buy, buy, BUY! An enlightened citizenry would not fall for that crap.
Most people don't get that about anarchism. I like the government of Zion in The Matrix. It is like a Native American form of leadership. The people who are considered the wisest rise to leadership and offer advice on governance, but do not impose it with law.
But, if self-interest is the ultimate organization for society, then we are in trouble, because that is mostly what we have, but a few people's interests are put ahead of the masses. cont.
1 what's the music playing in the background? you have saints? you pronounced 'interests' well. 'oppressive' i get, but 'evil' - gotta purge the vocab ('saints', etc.)
high school is the great american tragedy. property: slippery slope, long story. helvetius thinks you're wrong about our not being motivated entirely by self-interest. just as in math, you make a small error in the beginning & it really fucks you up in the long run.
2 overall, i hear ya. your impulses are correct, your approach proper, etc. you speak well (i mean w/distinctness - enunciation, etc.), i have a keen ear. could always use tightening here & there, but of which of even the most practiced of us is the same thing not true?
yeah, movies. some good things there, but mainly in the older ones, as you say. i'm pretty much done, let me know about the music if you will.
sorry my friend, I was listening for music, but didn't hear any, maybe you intended to comment on another video of mine. And I use the word "Saints" to show profound respect for the people that I idolize, and I think it lends even more weight since I'm an atheist.
yeah, i get what you meant by using the word, but you get what i'm saying, right? 'saint' has no meaning apart from religious contexts, seems therefore incongruous coming from the mouth of someone who...etc. same thing w/'evil', which can refer to morals having place apart from religion, but which doesn't, usually, is popularly understood to have reference to the morals of religions, etc. 'heroes' or 'cruel' would examples of alternatives. no biggie, though, movies are better than all of this.
re the music, i'm not sure where you're coming from. i'll play this for a few friends & see if they can identify the piece. it's obviously from either the late romantic or early 20th century period, sounds european (french, maybe?). i take it you routinely play classical radio, etc. i hear it as clearly as anything - as plainly evident as the image of the young boy's face hovering above your left shoulder. good luck & goodbye.
A definition of a state: An entity over a given territorial area, with a monopoly on the use of force. Hence, guys with the most guns = a state. On another point: how is forming cooperative mutually beneficial relationships (mutual aid) not self interest? These concepts do not (necessarily) have to function antagonistically. Self interest doesn't have to be a bad thing. Kropotkin himself took a neutral approach with "mutual aid," making it potentially compatible with both egoism and altruism.
I guess it's just my cynicism that associates self-interest as bad. I know exactly what you mean, if mutual aid is the law of progress, then it is in our self-interest to behave that way. I tend to use self-interest and greed interchangeably.
@LaughingMan0X people that are into anarchism should really looking into the venus project and watch some of the zeitgeist series preferable "moving forward". it is a scientific look at society and is basically an anarchist movement thro they do not follow that name.
I'll be getting a cam soon and I can't wait to respond. This stuff is exactly what I've been thinking about recently too. We're very much on the same page. Great stuff.
He specifically states in the beginning that laissez-fare capitalists misunderstood him and the whole movie is about how co-operation is superior to competition.
You are an interesting fellow. A gem at youtube...I feel like I found this cool channel that no one has caught onto yet....I'm so cool :)...oh and you are too...
Honestly though I'm a bit scared to get too many subs, because I'd like to keep a personal touch. Thanks though, you have quickly become one of my best friends on YOUTube.
Look into the Venus Project, this is the same stuff with main priniciples of anti money and pro technology. it is basically modern day scientific anarcho communism, thro they do not use that name.
TheMetalhead888 1 year ago
Also, a stateless society, is, indeed, anarchism. LACK OF POLITICAL HIERARCHY at all levels, and absence of a SINGLE RULER (i.e. state, or figurehead, or monarch), in favour of the INDIVIDUAL ruling the INDIVIDUAL.
napalmoneonezero 1 year ago
PEOPLE'S INTERESTS COMING INTO CONFLICT IS A FACT OF LIFE. IF YOU WISH TO HAVE A COMPLETELY FREE SOCIETY, YOU CANNOT IMPOSE LAWS LIMITING RIGHTS. TO DO SO IS ANTITHETICAL TO YOUR SUPPOSED VIEWPOINT. Do you want a communist state, or are you arguing for a libertarian capitalist system? It is VERY hard to tell what, in fact, you belive.
napalmoneonezero 1 year ago
"I inherently do not have faith in human nature." Isn't 'human nature' the basis of a society without coercion? anarcho-syndicalism seeks foremost to allow the inherent creative nature of persons be expressed. Without the 'order' of nature, this sounds like third-way liberalism, especially without settling radical sovereignty of the individual (the very basis of anarchism) in conflict with private property. Such conflicts are the black-boxing that Bookchin to Chomsky relegate in 'nature.'
pizzicatoiv 2 years ago
Whatever....You're probably a minarchist.
kittiest34 3 years ago
Jack, it is necessary for people to realize their connection to earth and to eachother scientifically. I used to be a non-theist just unconcerned but now I am an atheist because I want to help people emancipate themselves from religion and really start to take "Personal Responsibility" for actions.
kittiest34 3 years ago
People naturally seek alliances. They can also be very altruistic. People can reach agreements and share. They have been doing it ever since the Pleistocene without force, but with genuine desire. It is impossible to continue the way were going.....we'll blow eachother up eventually by not sharing resources. Nobody will ever be forced to share. People must have the freedom to participate or not.
kittiest34 3 years ago
sharing is never by force unless there is a parent.
kittiest34 3 years ago
May I suggest "The Conquest of Bread", "AnarchoSyndicalism",and "God and The State" for starters. Capitalists really can't be anarchists they are instead minarchists.
kittiest34 3 years ago
again, capitalism is just person A and person B trading good X and good Y as they both gain utility. no violence. no force. nothing immoral.
the state uses violence.
real capitalism is anarchy.
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
no third party (the taxman) involved.
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
Well, while that's true, capitalism is much more than that. It also comes with a package of ideas of property rights, and so-called "wage-slavery."
Perserus 2 years ago
Sorry, I didn't notice it was 5 months ago.
Perserus 2 years ago
I'm pretty much a new anarchist here. I am leaning over to the sydicalist side. I have read Marx of course b/c I was a socialist before. I just finished with "God and the State". I see myself as an individual but feel good about moving with people. Good video-btw
kittiest34 3 years ago
i dont understand how one can lean left and be an anarchist... how can spreading the wealth work without force? what if someone does not want to share?
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
Apparantly you know absolutely nothing about anarchy and socialism. Some people can be experts about a subject without ever having to pick up a book. All they need is to be told. I mean why in the hell would anybody pick a system of control? Its money less and decentralized, please pick up a book or read one online. Its only 150 years in the making.
kittiest34 3 years ago
oh wise one, please enlighten me with your knowledge...i had thought that 'collectivist anarchists' like yourself know about philosophy, but i guess the socratic method is not their way.
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
btw, decentralization and taking money out of the picture does not justify 'sharing' through force.
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
Let's say someone doesn't want to participate in the collectivization of private property (factories, farms etc.) They can have their own business/farm but no can work for them. (wage slavery) This was applied in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War and worked fine.
Androvich91 3 years ago
"no can work for them"
what if they want to? esp. cuz there is more money in private inst than collective ones.
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
Once people see how much better things are working in a democratic, non-hierarchical workplace no one would want to sell their labor power to a boss anymore. You don't see African Americans selling their liberty to Plantation owners anymore, because no sane person, if given the choice, would do so. Another thing, when you start to force people to do things that are not necessarily infringing on the rights of others, you get closer and closer to despotism and genocide.
Androvich91 3 years ago
dude, no disrespect but, i thought u would already be aware of the problems with the democratic process.
i dont understand how people can be against capitalism, its just person A and person B trading good X and good Y as they both gain utility. no violence. no force. nothing immoral.
but i guess, im okay with whatever you believe as long as you don't force me to be apart of it...
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
i love your mouth
mana0077 3 years ago
Wonderful video, I like how it was put together. I can see how your thoughts were hard to communicate all at once. Either way, it made me think.
I am looking at anarchy as my basic political philosophy. Right now, I am now still in this phase of being an American republican. It's hard to think outside that box.
I really think that liberatarianism is about as close as humankind may ever get to being a stateless, anarchistic society. Humans like to be protected and that calls for...
opinionhead444 4 years ago
at the very least allowing gun ownership and at the very most having a standing army. And humans like to have a safety net (like monetary security) and those ideas create many problems. Since I changed careers AND been married, my tax bill has increased almost 5 times. That alone should make any reasonable human blow a gasket.
One thing I still agree is how an anarchist can be a teacher. Another anarchist informed me that being a teacher is just a profession, as long as you don't cross any...
opinionhead444 4 years ago
violate any previously defined boundaries. I disagree because teachers must maintain order in a classroom on a daily basis and that creates a contradiction, or even an irony. Just try to keep a bunch of hormonal, rebellious teens in their seats during the spring. I don't power trip over my students, but I don't hide my disdain for certain rule violations.
Sorry for going tangential, but your video inspired to do so.
Keep up the good work.
opinionhead444 4 years ago
cont 2. Moreover, when people are educated to critical consciousness, then we will have a radical democracy, which is like your anarchist ideas.
As a student of critical pedagogy, I believe that goal of critical consciousness or enlightened citizenry can be achieved if the masses will ed it. But, as you know we are sucked into materialism and self-interest by the corporate media who want us to buy, buy, BUY! An enlightened citizenry would not fall for that crap.
peace
peacelf 4 years ago
Most people don't get that about anarchism. I like the government of Zion in The Matrix. It is like a Native American form of leadership. The people who are considered the wisest rise to leadership and offer advice on governance, but do not impose it with law.
But, if self-interest is the ultimate organization for society, then we are in trouble, because that is mostly what we have, but a few people's interests are put ahead of the masses. cont.
peacelf 4 years ago
Very insightful video, by the way.
peacelf 4 years ago
1 what's the music playing in the background? you have saints? you pronounced 'interests' well. 'oppressive' i get, but 'evil' - gotta purge the vocab ('saints', etc.)
high school is the great american tragedy. property: slippery slope, long story. helvetius thinks you're wrong about our not being motivated entirely by self-interest. just as in math, you make a small error in the beginning & it really fucks you up in the long run.
INeedAToiletQuick 4 years ago
2 overall, i hear ya. your impulses are correct, your approach proper, etc. you speak well (i mean w/distinctness - enunciation, etc.), i have a keen ear. could always use tightening here & there, but of which of even the most practiced of us is the same thing not true?
yeah, movies. some good things there, but mainly in the older ones, as you say. i'm pretty much done, let me know about the music if you will.
INeedAToiletQuick 4 years ago
sorry my friend, I was listening for music, but didn't hear any, maybe you intended to comment on another video of mine. And I use the word "Saints" to show profound respect for the people that I idolize, and I think it lends even more weight since I'm an atheist.
iamjackscolin 4 years ago
yeah, i get what you meant by using the word, but you get what i'm saying, right? 'saint' has no meaning apart from religious contexts, seems therefore incongruous coming from the mouth of someone who...etc. same thing w/'evil', which can refer to morals having place apart from religion, but which doesn't, usually, is popularly understood to have reference to the morals of religions, etc. 'heroes' or 'cruel' would examples of alternatives. no biggie, though, movies are better than all of this.
INeedAToiletQuick 4 years ago
re the music, i'm not sure where you're coming from. i'll play this for a few friends & see if they can identify the piece. it's obviously from either the late romantic or early 20th century period, sounds european (french, maybe?). i take it you routinely play classical radio, etc. i hear it as clearly as anything - as plainly evident as the image of the young boy's face hovering above your left shoulder. good luck & goodbye.
INeedAToiletQuick 4 years ago
A definition of a state: An entity over a given territorial area, with a monopoly on the use of force. Hence, guys with the most guns = a state. On another point: how is forming cooperative mutually beneficial relationships (mutual aid) not self interest? These concepts do not (necessarily) have to function antagonistically. Self interest doesn't have to be a bad thing. Kropotkin himself took a neutral approach with "mutual aid," making it potentially compatible with both egoism and altruism.
LaughingMan0X 4 years ago
I guess it's just my cynicism that associates self-interest as bad. I know exactly what you mean, if mutual aid is the law of progress, then it is in our self-interest to behave that way. I tend to use self-interest and greed interchangeably.
iamjackscolin 4 years ago
@LaughingMan0X people that are into anarchism should really looking into the venus project and watch some of the zeitgeist series preferable "moving forward". it is a scientific look at society and is basically an anarchist movement thro they do not follow that name.
TheMetalhead888 1 year ago
I'll be getting a cam soon and I can't wait to respond. This stuff is exactly what I've been thinking about recently too. We're very much on the same page. Great stuff.
jtr3030 4 years ago
I like your videos. I am a voluntarist.
DeraJa 4 years ago
Whether or not we are motivated by self interest is a question over the definition of "self-interest".
Check out; "Nice Guys Finish First" for a great documentary by Dawkins on the subject.
Luke12000 4 years ago
He specifically states in the beginning that laissez-fare capitalists misunderstood him and the whole movie is about how co-operation is superior to competition.
jtr3030 4 years ago
"He specifically states in the beginning that laissez-fare capitalists misunderstood him..."
...Possibly because Dawkins misunderstands ecenomics.
blackacidlizzard 4 years ago
It is in my self-interest for me to have no self-interest. Don't understand? Check out the Tao Te Ching, it'll blow your mind.
GlobalDissident 4 years ago
don't be fooled. i wrote that text, was just playing semantic games, it's nothing to get hung about, in another game-player's phrase.
INeedAToiletQuick 4 years ago
You are an interesting fellow. A gem at youtube...I feel like I found this cool channel that no one has caught onto yet....I'm so cool :)...oh and you are too...
pypermarru1 4 years ago
No, you were right, you are cool.
Honestly though I'm a bit scared to get too many subs, because I'd like to keep a personal touch. Thanks though, you have quickly become one of my best friends on YOUTube.
iamjackscolin 4 years ago