Complete control vs. complete anarchy?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

ITT people who have never read anything about anarchy outside of the lunatic ravings of Hobbes

And yes, I'm a lunatic ravings of Hobbes and Goethe .
But seriously, "complete anarchy" doesn't seem to look like "anarchy" like Proudhon wanted because in this poll.

Complete anarchy in Spain seemed to have worked pretty well before it was stamped out by totalitarians at gun point.

"Anarchy" during the Spanish Civil War was in practice just another form of violent totalitarianism, based upon the killing of perceived political and ideological enemies. 

In terms of not awful societies that exist mostly outside the control of the state (though not necessarily outside of all forms of social control) there's been some interesting though controversial research done by James Scott and others on the Zomia region of Southeast Asia.

[TNF]

ITT people who have never read anything about anarchy outside of the lunatic ravings of Hobbes

And yes, I'm a lunatic ravings of Hobbes and Goethe .
But seriously, "complete anarchy" doesn't seem to look like "anarchy" like Proudhon wanted because in this poll.

Complete anarchy in Spain seemed to have worked pretty well before it was stamped out by totalitarians at gun point.

"Anarchy" during the Spanish Civil War was in practice just another form of violent totalitarianism, based upon the killing of perceived political and ideological enemies. 

In terms of not awful societies that exist mostly outside the control of the state (though not necessarily outside of all forms of social control) there's been some interesting though controversial research done by James Scott and others on the Zomia region of Southeast Asia.

Yeah, I'm not going to fault the Spanish anarchists for shooting their exploiters in the head in the same way I wouldn't fault the French Jacobins for lopping off the head of Louis Capet. Revolutions get messy, and not all violence is equal. Killing he who exploits and oppresses =/= killing an innocent person.

[TNF]

ITT people who have never read anything about anarchy outside of the lunatic ravings of Hobbes

"Real anarchy" is an even sillier utopia than "real communism".

Translation: I don't actually want to change the operational oppression inherent in the society in which we live, just rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

[Hifly]

complete control

[Antonio the Sixth]

ITT people who have never read anything about anarchy outside of the lunatic ravings of Hobbes

"Real anarchy" is an even sillier utopia than "real communism".

Translation: I don't actually want to change the operational oppression inherent in the society in which we live, just rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I'm interested in actually trying to minimize the operational oppression inherent in the society in which we live, as opposed to wasting my time and energy pursuing an ideological fantasyland.

[TNF]

ITT people who have never read anything about anarchy outside of the lunatic ravings of Hobbes

"Real anarchy" is an even sillier utopia than "real communism".

Translation: I don't actually want to change the operational oppression inherent in the society in which we live, just rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I'm interested in actually trying to minimize the operational oppression inherent in the society in which we live, as opposed to wasting my time and energy pursuing an ideological fantasyland.

Utopia is to be pursued with the knowledge that we may never achieve it precisely because doing so will yield the greatest results. No one is going to struggle for piecemeal reforms. People struggle for revolution and get reform, and so in the end everyone benefits.

[Oakvale]

I'm not sure what the point of this thread is but obviously the latter.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

After suffering under fascism, I would choose anarchy.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

ITT people who have never read anything about anarchy outside of the lunatic ravings of Hobbes

And yes, I'm a lunatic ravings of Hobbes and Goethe .
But seriously, "complete anarchy" doesn't seem to look like "anarchy" like Proudhon wanted because in this poll.

Complete anarchy in Spain seemed to have worked pretty well before it was stamped out by totalitarians at gun point.

"Anarchy" during the Spanish Civil War was in practice just another form of violent totalitarianism, based upon the killing of perceived political and ideological enemies. 

In terms of not awful societies that exist mostly outside the control of the state (though not necessarily outside of all forms of social control) there's been some interesting though controversial research done by James Scott and others on the Zomia region of Southeast Asia.

Yeah, I'm not going to fault the Spanish anarchists for shooting their exploiters in the head in the same way I wouldn't fault the French Jacobins for lopping off the head of Louis Capet. Revolutions get messy, and not all violence is equal. Killing he who exploits and oppresses =/= killing an innocent person.

Even if you approve of it, it is mass violence for the purpose of absolute political control. It is inherently totalitarian.

[Redalgo]

I voted for "complete control" only because the alternative was a form of anarchism with no government whatever - no elected councils or directly-democratic assemblies at the municipal level offering policies to be complied with or ignored on a voluntary, individual-to-individual basis. Without having any leadership and coordination at all we may as well be abandoning the tribal tendencies of our species altogether, no? At least there is an off-chance the totalitarian regime would be permissive and dedicated enough to gather input from the masses and craft policies with some measure of respect for the public interest.

Anarchy might be preferable though if it were stateless rather than without any kind of government.

[King]

Depends on what she's in the mood for.

[Hamster]

I voted for "complete control" only because the alternative was a form of anarchism with no government whatever - no elected councils or directly-democratic assemblies at the municipal level offering policies to be complied with or ignored on a voluntary, individual-to-individual basis. Without having any leadership and coordination at all we may as well be abandoning the tribal tendencies of our species altogether, no? At least there is an off-chance the totalitarian regime would be permissive and dedicated enough to gather input from the masses and craft policies with some measure of respect for the public interest.

Anarchy might be preferable though if it were stateless rather than without any kind of government.

Anarchy by most definitions is a stateless society.

After suffering under fascism, I would choose anarchy.

Really? Where are you from?

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Really? Where are you from?

Campbell County, Ky.

[Hamster]

Really? Where are you from?

Campbell County, Ky.

Such humor.

[Mordecai]

Complete anarchy.

[PiMp DaDdy FitzGerald]

Really? Where are you from?

Campbell County, Ky.

Such humor.

That was actually one of the killing fields Pol Pot used. He stopped sending people there because he thought it was too inhumane.