Any Other Anarchists Here?

[EgoRaptor]

I am a Emma Goldman-style anarchist (although more of a Kropotkin on foreign policy). Some people voted anarchist on the poll I started. I'm wondering what kind of anarchists other people are.

[kılıç_mehmet]

There is only one type of anarchist on earth.

[EgoRaptor]

There is only one type of anarchist on earth.

All anarchists want to eliminate the state, but there are different types of anarchism. There are primitivists, socialists, individualists, egoists & most anarchists fall into several of these categories.

[TaraJo]

I am a Emma Goldman-style anarchist (although more of a Kropotkin in foreign policy). Some people voted anarchist on the poll I started. I'm wondering what kind of anarchists other people are.

Before I'm going to subscribe to a particular political philosophy, I'm going to want some evidence that it works. So far, I have yet to see any evidence of any anarchistic society that has worked. The closest we have to an anarchistic society right now is Somalia and I certainly don't want to emulate that.

[kılıç_mehmet]

There is only one type of anarchist on earth.

All anarchists want to eliminate the state, but there are different types of anarchism. There are primitivists, socialists, individualists, egoists & most anarchists fall into several of these categories.

Yes and all are on paper. They never have seen much application.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Anarchism can never work. The notion that the State can be replaced by free associations of individuals working for the common good ascribes a nobility of purpose to human beings which, quite frankly, we do not possess.

Wisdom is not additive. Its maximum is that of the wisest person in a given group. Such a person will naturally gravitate to a position of leadership, because other people will naturally follow him/her. And guess what we call that? The State.

Boru

[EgoRaptor]

Anarchism can never work. The notion that the State can be replaced by free associations of individuals working for the common good ascribes a nobility of purpose to human beings which, quite frankly, we do not possess.

Wisdom is not additive. Its maximum is that of the wisest person in a given group. Such a person will naturally gravitate to a position of leadership, because other people will naturally follow him/her. And guess what we call that? The State.

Boru

Most anarchism is egotist based. It assumes that people will look after themselves.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Anarchism can never work. The notion that the State can be replaced by free associations of individuals working for the common good ascribes a nobility of purpose to human beings which, quite frankly, we do not possess.

Wisdom is not additive. Its maximum is that of the wisest person in a given group. Such a person will naturally gravitate to a position of leadership, because other people will naturally follow him/her. And guess what we call that? The State.

Boru

Most anarchism is egotist based. It assumes that people will look after themselves.

Which is an unjustified assumption. Essentially pack animals, human beings seem to require a leader.

Furthermore, the notion of people looking after themselves won't work, either. Suppose I show up at your house, beat you senseless with a club, and nick all your goods. As an anarchist, you can't call the cops, you can't get your friends to come after me, you can't sue me, etc., as all these things require you to be assisted by other people (hence, not 'looking after yourself'). More extremely, I could not just beat you, but KILL you, and I would suffer no consequences.

Sorry, mate, but it's just not on. Anarchism is a pipe dream in the purest sense of the term.

Boru

[EgoRaptor]

Most anarchism is egotist based. It assumes that people will look after themselves.

Which is an unjustified assumption. Essentially pack animals, human beings seem to require a leader.

Furthermore, the notion of people looking after themselves won't work, either. Suppose I show up at your house, beat you senseless with a club, and nick all your goods. As an anarchist, you can't call the cops, you can't get your friends to come after me, you can't sue me, etc., as all these things require you to be assisted by other people (hence, not 'looking after yourself'). More extremely, I could not just beat you, but KILL you, and I would suffer no consequences.

Sorry, mate, but it's just not on. Anarchism is a pipe dream in the purest sense of the term.

Boru

That is why I believe we need eugenics to breed better, more individualistic people before the state can be abolished.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Which is an unjustified assumption. Essentially pack animals, human beings seem to require a leader.

Furthermore, the notion of people looking after themselves won't work, either. Suppose I show up at your house, beat you senseless with a club, and nick all your goods. As an anarchist, you can't call the cops, you can't get your friends to come after me, you can't sue me, etc., as all these things require you to be assisted by other people (hence, not 'looking after yourself'). More extremely, I could not just beat you, but KILL you, and I would suffer no consequences.

Sorry, mate, but it's just not on. Anarchism is a pipe dream in the purest sense of the term.

Boru

That is why I believe we need eugenics to breed better, more individualistic people before the state can be abolished.

Yeah, when you locate the gene or gene complex that controls 'individualism', get back to me.

Boru