Why aren't you fighting for a classless society yet?

Why aren't you fighting for a classless society yet?

because some people are better than others. this is why society naturally falls into classes.

...

because i'm not a twentysomething anymore

i'd rather just get drunk

that's the only thing to do with bate. take them seriously.

> makes indefensible statement
> gets called on it
> HURR DURR I WAS ONLY TROLING

sure, kid.

who cleans the toilets in your stateless society?

Because I own my own home and car, have a good job, and money in the bank? Fuck you, OP!

this

because this is Sup Forums, so we already have a place with no class.

So what's the point

Because I have qualifications and a chance at being successful.

I'm fucked up and I'm with OP

GO COMMIES

funny how it's always the lower end of the evolutionary scale that agitates for a classless society.

OP, i'll join your revolution. i'll fight for a classless society. who do i have to punch in the face for all mankind to recognize the inherent rightness of egalitarianism?

Fight alone makes no sense. We need more people. Unite against the system

did you know that the Communists sided with the Fascists AGAINST the Anarchists in the Spanish Civil war?

GO FASCISTS

Because it's unrealistic. Utopia is a dream. Wake up to the nightmare. People are inherently greedy and prone to seclusion. The best thing to fight for is a limit to greed (say no one can own more than $50 million worth of assets). Instead play to their inherent vanity (you can continue to earn to up to $70 million worth of assets if you pay for a public hospital or some shit that will be named after you and a bust of you will be included in a hall of fame specifically designed for people who pay for public projects under the new laws). This as well as a new house of parliament perhaps called the "plebian house". This house of parliament can only be elected by people who own under say $300,000 worth of assets. This house of "plebticians" have no real power over legislation however they can make statements to the media deriding legislation which favours the rich. They are able to use government sources legitimately to advertise that agenda.

Just an idea. Maybe retarded as it would have to be introduced worldwide to actually work. (if someone wanted to earn more than the limit of $50 million then they could just move to a different country). But I think it's a start

Yeah but anarchists are dickheads

barcelonatarded here
the stalinist persecuted the anarchists (CNT) and revisionist (POUM) during the II republic and the war but there were no pacts whit the fascists

in most/all societies, "class" dictates happiness based on a spectrum of poor to wealthy. in poor parts of africa or india, people dream of having a "clock radio" much as "borat" joked about--but it's true--and overall, most people in any society will say they are 5-6/10 happy.

i got an A in "the philosophy of happiness" last semester so i know the material.

statism is a dichotomy spectrum, biliniar, if you will

i am still waiting for a teenage nascent anarchist to step up and tell us who cleans the toilets in the classless society.

are jobs classless? is the job of writing iphone apps equal to the job of scraping shit off the walls of a toilet after the drunks have used it? do both jobs get the same return?

who gets to decide who does which job?

i've never had a self-avowed anarchist answer this question. they seem to prefer to argue with other anarchists over syndicalism vs free markets and such.

of course there were no official pacts. the communists were embarrassed they'd originally sided with the anarchists. and then they were dumped when it looked like they might actually win.

>barcelonatarded here

Yeah right mate. The Communists at first sided with the Anarchists against the Fascists. Then The Communists fought the Anarchists but did NOT side with Franco you fucking moron. Franco's forces continued fighting the Communists while the Communists intermittently fought other smaller groups

>Because it's unrealistic. Utopia is a dream. Wake up to the nightmare. People are inherently greedy and prone to seclusion.

If people are inherently greedy then we should design a system where it's impossible for greed to lead to a small number of people usurping on the wealth and power.

> statism
> dichotomy
> spectrum,
> biliniar

you don't know what any of those words mean, and you mis-spelled "bi-linear", which isn't a real word.

>calls himself "anarchist"
>doesn't promote tax evasion and free market
>is an anti-gun stuck up faggot

Live free or die, niggers.

Anarchism is the crow, which watches from the shoulder.

Because I have an easy life and I don't really give a fk about other poeple and it's the same for 90% of average population

buying youre own private police and laws is not anarchy

Did you read my whole post? That is my idea anyway. Limit greed. Limit power. Limit wealth. Limit it all but you can't discount it. Capitalism works because of greed. Communism fails for the same reason. A "Limitocracy" I feel is the best untried solution (even though I just made that word up)

What's the big deal of Anarchism anons?
I don't see nothing exciting if humanity still keeps persisting

so you would all rather argue about what Anarchism is, rather than fight for a stateless society.

this is why Anarchism will never be a thing.

shutup cunt mind your own business

i dont want to live in africa.

I'm a left anarchist and I'm pro-gun. Most of us are, actually.

so whats a stated society then?

>inb4 roads

barcelona has been one of the few cities that has lived in anarchy, and im an anachyst, thats why i say it

When you break the system, what then?

m.a.c?
quienes son?

widen your scope

The worth of a human isn't defined by his working power

because i dont want a bunch of backwards rednecks trying to rape my children and steal my shit.

Yes I read the whole post. What system better wields man's innate greed/selfishness?

A) A system where the vast majority of people work to enrich business owners (capitalism)

B) A system where the vast majority of people work to enrich themselves and their fellow workers

Humans are not just greedy. We are also altruistic. The best system will have elements of both aspects of human nature.

You didn't answer my question

Well, that's a pretty shitty argument you have right there

because im not 12

I do tho just not the faggot way

What defines someone's worth in your opinion

semantically redefine your boundaries.
are you new or something?

RETROACTIVE LINGUISTICITY

The simple fact that he is human. If we would say a man is worthless just because he can't work anymore, what would happen to disabled and old people? Are they just scum because they can't contribute to society? I think not, but that's just my opinion because I am able to feel empathy

>repackaged dog meat

People like you are detrimental for a classless society

Scum? No, they're just not worth as much as someone who can work.

Anal sex is hot but shit smells fucking bad!

depends on your diet/genetics

nice dubs

You trying to tell me your shit don't stink?

Most of us lefty Anarchists are pro all the positive freedoms (guns, speech etc.) You're confusing us with the feminazi/SJWs that CLAIM to be anarchists, when really one can never be an anarchist whilst believing in censorship, political correctness and special treatment of women.

this, anarchists are pro everything that can be consented to, you are not allowed to force people to do anything.

Like pay taxes?