I disagree . I think it's possible to make it work.

(September 9, 2017 at 5:00 pm)Aegon Wrote: Honestly there just isn't a point in being anarcho-anything. It's so impossible and impractical.

... unless you're able to fetch everything you need for yourself.

Anarchy is the individual expression of autarky. Just as no nation can provide all its own needs from within its borders, neither can any one human provide his own needs without compromise to another. Trusting another human in compromise -- a total stranger, mind you, not a family member or loved one -- without another solid foundation is simply pieintheskyism. And that other foundation is law, which of course implies government. If someone screws me over I can hire a lawyer and appeal to the agreed standards of behavior in a court which can agree or disagree with me. It may be imperfect, but it's a damned sight better than trusting the good will of a total stranger.

Of course, that's a lesson taught by time and responsibility.

(September 9, 2017 at 3:53 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:

(September 9, 2017 at 1:22 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: I still want to know how anarchy handles something like the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, or shit, even the basics, like education.

And he still hasn't answered my assertion that anarchy would kill someone like me.  I may need to provide more info, though, so here it is:

I was born physically disabled.  I've had, to date, 43 surgeries related to my disability in order to give me the (limited) mobility I enjoy today.  Of course, surgeries don't just happen in a vacuum, I also had countless hours of physical therapy after those surgeries.  And, even with those surgeries, I still need a ton of help.  Some of it is technological (wheelchairs, shower chairs, a modified bathroom, a ceiling lift, etc.).  Some of it is physical (constant assistance with activities of daily living).  There are secondary issues with my disability (pressure sores) which have also required treatment.  I have had MRSA, a serious and deadly infection, multiple times because of them.

I'm also a diabetic.  It's late onset Type I... most of the males on my mom's side of the family got it in their early 30s regardless of their diet or physical activity.  I have it, and my oldest brother has it.  I'm on several medications in order to regulate my blood glucose levels.  Without them, I will die.

I also have had a history of kidney stones.  Almost 2 years ago I had one that blocked my left ureter.  Because of the blockage, my left kidney filled with both urine and puss, and I was septic.  I had a 105 fever, and was in the process of dying.  It took two surgeries, a hospital stay, and a shit load of antibiotics to fix me.  I now have to take a citric-phosphate solution every day (tastes like shit) in order to combat the formation of stones, and see my urologist semi-regularly (I have an appointment early next month).

So, tell me... how will anarchy address these issues?  Or am I simply supposed to die?  And if that's the case, do you really think I'll consider it the way to go?  I tend to not react well to people who, intentionally or not, want to kill me.  And, keep in mind, there are millions of other people with health issues just as deadly without the treatment provided to them by the government.  My family racked up a ton of debt over my care, even with insurance, and it was only due to more liberal policies - both Federal and state - that they were able to get out of it.

I think you're incredibly naive, a crusader who doesn't actually know what they're crusading against.  That's okay... it's what 17 year olds do.

For the hurricane depends on the school

Same for healthcare . Some anarchism argue health as a right and propose communal means of providing it. (Most forms of collectivist anarchism or Altruist Anarchists  And most on the anarchist left believe this) 

Most forms of religious anarchists treat caring for the sick as a religious duty.

Anarcho-pacifism would argue that not helping you would be a form of violence against you.

How would such a communal system work? I mean, I need 24-hour help, along with important medication and technology to simply live. Medicare and Medicaid are, for all intents and purposes, guarantees. Yeah, assholes in Congress can change it, revoke it, whatever, but that's still a lot less volatile than anything anarchy suggests. Now, multiply me by several million.

(September 9, 2017 at 5:31 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: I disagree . I think it's possible to make it work.

And what would you do to your local Trump, who screws you out of a contract? What would you do when a mudslide wipes you out and you've no shelter or food? What would you do when you've got appendicitis and the only guy local who knows how to handle it demands your wife in his bed? What about when you get robbed and no one will report to the nonexistent police because they're terrified of getting their brains bashed in?

If you don't think these elements exist in humans, you're wrong.

(September 7, 2017 at 3:40 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:

(September 7, 2017 at 3:23 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Ah yes, "capitalism."

From a guy who is constantly and consistently negative, I'd expect as much.

Don't be negative.

P.S. I am a guy who is known for being constantly and consistently hypocritical, so I never take my own advice.

(September 9, 2017 at 6:56 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(September 9, 2017 at 5:31 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: I disagree . I think it's possible to make it work.

And what would you do to your local Trump, who screws you out of a contract? What would you do when a mudslide wipes you out and you've no shelter or food? What would you do when you've got appendicitis and the only guy local who knows how to handle it demands your wife in his bed? What about when you get robbed and no one will report to the nonexistent police because they're terrified of getting their brains bashed in?

If you don't think these elements exist in humans, you're wrong.

Once again you guys keep confusing lawlessness with Anarchism . And I have denied nothing . I have already pointed out elsewhere different schools have different solutions to idea of law and order . This is almost as bad theists who insist Atheism leads to nihilism

---

(September 9, 2017 at 6:54 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:

(September 9, 2017 at 3:53 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: For the hurricane depends on the school

Same for healthcare . Some anarchism argue health as a right and propose communal means of providing it. (Most forms of collectivist anarchism or Altruist Anarchists  And most on the anarchist left believe this) 

Most forms of religious anarchists treat caring for the sick as a religious duty.

Anarcho-pacifism would argue that not helping you would be a form of violence against you.

How would such a communal system work?  I mean, I need 24-hour help, along with important medication and technology to simply live.  Medicare and Medicaid are, for all intents and purposes, guarantees.  Yeah, assholes in Congress can change it, revoke it, whatever, but that's still a lot less volatile than anything anarchy suggests.  Now, multiply me by several million.

I'm not sure what you mean ? are you suggesting that a communal medicare can't exist ? And why would such a system be volatile . This sounds disturbingly like theists who insist that if laws don't come from a magical source then anything goes.

(September 9, 2017 at 7:44 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Once again you guys keep confusing lawlessness with Anarchism .

Good lord, Tizh. What exactly do you think enforces the law?

That's right: government.

Now, allow me another question: how do we define anarchy?

That's right: the lack of government.

Please, be clear and precise. How do you propose to pass and enforce laws without government operating?

Anarchy is, by definition, lawlessness -- with everything that implies. Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful anarchic society. I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.

(September 9, 2017 at 7:44 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: And I have denied nothing . I have already pointed out elsewhere different schools have different solutions to idea of law and order . This is almost as bad theists who insist Atheism leads to nihilism

How would you have laws without government? Tell me how human relations might be peaceful without government when even with governments there are still robberies, rapes, murders, and so on? Be specific. There are seven billion people on this Earth. You honestly expect them all to regulate themselves?

I notice you didn't answer a single point of mine. Perhaps once you climb down off'n your soapbox you could deign to, you know, actually communicate.

(September 9, 2017 at 7:56 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(September 9, 2017 at 7:44 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Once again you guys keep confusing lawlessness with Anarchism .

Good lord, Tizh. What exactly do you think enforces the law?

That's right: government.

Now, allow me another question: how do we define anarchy?

That's right: the lack of government.

Please, be clear and precise. How do you propose to pass and enforce laws without government operating?

Anarchy is, by definition, lawlessness -- with everything that implies. Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful anarchic society. I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.

(September 9, 2017 at 7:44 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: And I have denied nothing . I have already pointed out elsewhere different schools have different solutions to idea of law and order . This is almost as bad theists who insist Atheism leads to nihilism

How would you have laws without government?  Tell me how human relations might be peaceful without government when even with governments there are still robberies, rapes, murders, and so on? Be specific.

I watch a youtuber and part of his talking points is advocating some form of anarchy. 

I don't know all the ins and outs of the proposal but in relation to the example you provided of people entering contracts he has a video talking about precisely that.

The proposal is that there would be an organization a bit like an insurance company, when you both enter a contract you both do so with the help of a dispute resolution organization which you both agree upon.

Right now you have the police who uphold the law and they are a government agency, the idea in anarchy is that people voluntarily pay for law and order to be upheld in their community instead of the police being paid for by forced taxation.

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/t...-faq-12-17
Deals with several misunderstandings I keep seeing on this thread . (laws included )

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/c...al-justice
Anarchist legal theory

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/p...-authority
Again

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/r...-anarchism
Again

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/d...illegality
Why Anarchist system must have laws

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/h...-anarchism
A theortical formation

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/r...-and-crime
Another very good bare bones view of laws in an anarchist vision

---

Lets alter your response shall we to make my point

Good lord, Tizh. What exactly do you think enforces morality ?
That's right: Religion .
Now, allow me another question: how do we define  secularism?
That's right: the lack of religious influence in society.
Please, be clear and precise. How do you propose to pass and enforce Morality without a Religious authority operating?
Anarchy is, by definition, immorality-- with everything that implies. Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful Irreligious society . I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.


Or I could take this final line and rewrite it as

Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful flying machine before the wright brothers  . I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.

Or

Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful orbital Rocket launch before Sputnik-PS. I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.

(September 9, 2017 at 8:02 pm)paulpablo Wrote: The proposal is that there would be an organization a bit like an insurance company, when you both enter a contract you both do so with the help of a dispute resolution organization which you both agree upon.

And what, exactly, keeps that company from taking money from the both of you and not answering the phone?

(September 9, 2017 at 8:02 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Right now you have the police who uphold the law and they are a government agency, the idea in anarchy is that people voluntarily pay for law and order to be upheld in their community instead of the police being paid for by forced taxation.

I'm sure that will result in voluntary handouts surpassing the obligations we now face as citizens. No doubt the generosity of human spirit will fund not only police enforcing non-existent laws (because remember, we're talking about no government, no legislature, no laws), but will also help to pay for roads, firehouses, ambulances, and so on.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. A "dispute resolution organization" could just as easily be a scam and you'd be none the wiser, taking your money and moving on. Explain why this is a different organization than, you know, a government. At least with a government, I've got firefighters willing to put their asses on the line to save my son or wife.

I'm of the opinion that so-called "anarchists" are folks who like what they have and want more, but don't understand that there ain't any free ride.

---

(September 9, 2017 at 8:06 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Lets alter your response shall we to make my point

Good lord, Tizh. What exactly do you think enforces the morality ?
That's right: Religion .
Now, allow me another question: how do we define  secularism?
That's right: the lack of religious influence in society.
Please, be clear and precise. How do you propose to pass and enforce Morality without a Religious authority operating?
Anarchy is, by definition, immorality-- with everything that implies. Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful Irreligious society . I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.


Or I could take this final line and rewrite it as

Feel free to point me to any one single example of a successful flying machine before the right brothers  . I'll be happy to point you to failed examples.

Rather, how about you answer my questions as I asked them, which is what someone expects from an honest person?

If you cannot answer them, say "I don't know" -- but this twisting of words is horseshit. You and I both know it ... but only you think it's right. We are talking about governance, not religion, yet you're making a base appeal in order to shore up a failing argument.

Sociology is not the physics of flight. I'd recommend you think a little on the issue before you post again.