Does race and IQ destroy anarchist theories? And if so why? If not, why not? Discuss.
Does race and IQ destroy anarchist theories? And if so why? If not, why not? Discuss
How do you punish degenerates/pedo's/abusers without force?
anarchist theories are all ideals and thus they all dont work because human behavior is not ideal
its not just race and IQ, anarchy would not work even in the whitest country
Why can't there be force? I'm a wild west anarchist.
If you have absolute freedom of association and the ability to price out low income people then no. You will just have de facto racial segregation instead of de jure.
Trying to be intellectually honest here though, I know Sup Forums doesn't have a great record on that. I honestly could for see it as being a end result, but in the short term impossible. But what I'm wondering how can there be direct democracy if some people aren't capable of even making strict informed decisions. And when I say some I mean groups. Like for instance I personally think religious people shouldn't be allowed to vote or people who hold certain views that can be harmful to humanity as a whole. I'm more elitist in that sense, majority of people who vote in America don't even know how the government operates to begin with. Big issue to clear up in my eyes.
race and IQ dont destroy anarchist theories,however anarchist theories,like most idealistic systems,ignore human nature and cannot work
Rojava.
Revolutionary Catalonia.
Free Society Of Ukraine.
3 examples of anarchist societies
>fascist
>gives proof go anarchism
Gave me a kek
But I would figure that the key stone of anarchist ideas is direct democracy, how can you have a functioning one when people can't function in the first place?
those are not anarchies you dumb fuck
I would advise anyone not to live in echo chambers.
Not to only research into one political philosophy, most people do that, and so they never challenge their beliefs.
I've research into Libertarian philosophy (eg. Rand, Rothbard, etc), Anarchism (eg. Gary Chartier, Kevin Carson, Anarcho Synidicalism), Socialism (eg. Gaddafi), Social Democracy (eg. Michael Meacher, George Lakey), left wing economic theory (eg. Ha Joon Chang, Marianna Mazzucato) and conservative economic theory (eg. Ian Fletcher), and of course Fascism (eg. H R Morgan's books, Strasserism, Georgio Giovanni, youtuber CTrants/cultured thug).
I would strongly advise anyone not to diet themselves on only one political philosophy.
I'm a Left Wing Nationalist (Fascism is the closest flag, it shares a lot of values).
>use force to stop your good idea
In answer to your picture, the ideas that spread do
the right of conquest is the oldest and strongest right
Yes they are.
If you were familiar with anarchist political philsophy you would know that.
Anarchism, in regards to political philosophy, does not mean social chaos.
It means decentralized governance. They are/were all forms of decentralized governance.
A few books on Anarchist political theory...
Left wing Market Anarchism...
Markets Not Capitalism By Gary Cartier
radgeek.com
History of Anarcho-Syndicalism in spain...
youtube.com
Anarcho-communism...
theanarchistlibrary.org
You'll be woke after looking into those.
>decentralized governance
so according to that every federal system is anarchy
wrong you dumb fucking retard. anarchy literally means NO GOVERNMENT just like asexual means no sexuality instead of decentralized sexuality
>I will change the meaning of words so that they support my false claims
>roads
destroy anarchist thoeries user
Because others will use force on you.
>so according to that every federal system is anarchy
Not if there is a centralized government.
>wrong you dumb fucking retard. anarchy literally means NO GOVERNMENT
You haven't read a single anarchist philosopher have you?
Governance =/= government.
Governance is social organization. You can have governance without a state.
A state is centralized governance.
...
>Governance is social organization. You can have governance without a state.
How exactly would you do that let alone execute the governance?
Good ideas don’t require force if it was true that there was one thing that was in the best interest of everybody, but since that’s not true, some force required.
If you understand that one group benefit at the expense of others then those who benefit have a material basis for resisting the idea that it should be any other way. You cannot expect a king to rationally give up power, it’s not in his interest. Communists have no illusions that capitalists will simply ‘become enlightened’, because it would actually be deeply against their material interests to submit to communism.
>Governance =/= government
yes. however, the governing entity is either the government or an equivalent
anarchy means that there is NO governing entity at all, the opposite of hierarchy where there IS a governing structure
of course for something to be an anarchy I do not demand that even families and businessses have anarchic structures but apart from such few exceptions there should be zero broader social governance or it is not an anarchy