Gothic.net Community
Page 5 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gothic.net Community (https://www.gothic.net/boards/index.php)
-   Politics (https://www.gothic.net/boards/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Pick your flavor of Anarchy. (https://www.gothic.net/boards/showthread.php?t=16787)

Deadmanwalking_05 11-01-2009 05:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan (Post 577110)
How does the powerful minority not punish the disenfranchised, whether it be a majority (example: Vietnam, East Timor, Palestine, South Africa, Chile, Nicaragua) or a minority (example: Rwanda, Tibet, Chiapas)?

I'm not saying that doesn't happen Al.

What problem do you have with a common truth that all forms of Government can and have failed throughout history no matter what label has been slapped on it (Yes I am including Representative forms of Governance as well)?

Is it because you have an entire persona devoted to those ideals?

(This is an honest question,I'm not trying to take a pot shot at you)

viscus 11-01-2009 05:50 PM
Sure it might fail, but does that make it not worth trying? Is ending systematic exploitation of humanity and ecology not a worthwhile pursuit?

Deadmanwalking_05 11-01-2009 06:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by viscus (Post 577124)
Sure it might fail, but does that make it not worth trying? Is ending systematic exploitation of humanity and ecology not a worthwhile pursuit?
I'm not saying your cause wouldn't be worthy and well intentioned but....


Would the projected price of that failure be worth the cost?

Because as some like to say,the road to hell is paved with the best of intentions.

viscus 11-01-2009 06:30 PM
I don't advocate revolution if that's what you're getting at, and I don't think that anyone else here is either. But I do think that we should work within the existing structure towards a society that is more cooperative, non-exploitative, and ultimately classless.

There have been some promising developments around the world, but there is yet a lot more work to be done.

Despanan 11-01-2009 06:42 PM
Dude,

What the hell happened to deadman? Did he finally start taking his medicine or something?

Deadmanwalking_05 11-01-2009 07:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan (Post 577136)
Dude,

What the hell happened to deadman? Did he finally start taking his medicine or something?
I've just been smoking good weed.

Saya 11-01-2009 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05 (Post 577117)
I'm not saying that doesn't happen Al.

What problem do you have with a common truth that all forms of Government can and have failed throughout history no matter what label has been slapped on it (Yes I am including Representative forms of Governance as well)?

Is it because you have an entire persona devoted to those ideals?

(This is an honest question,I'm not trying to take a pot shot at you)
With representative forms of government, you let a politician scare you into voting for them or they bribe you. This has been shown to encourage hierarchy, whether it be racism, sexism or classism. As long as a group of few rule the many based on how pretty their speeches are this will always be true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan
Dude,

What the hell happened to deadman? Did he finally start taking his medicine or something?p
He's claiming this piece of prose: https://www.gothic.net/boards/showthread.php?t=11877

is a part of some study he is doing and our reaction to horrible prose somehow proves that Alex Jones is correct about....something. How does that make sense to you?

Despanan 11-01-2009 07:51 PM
Gahhhh! My fucking eyes!

Deadmanwalking_05 11-01-2009 08:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saya (Post 577144)
With representative forms of government, you let a politician scare you into voting for them or they bribe you. This has been shown to encourage hierarchy, whether it be racism, sexism or classism. As long as a group of few rule the many based on how pretty their speeches are this will always be true.



He's claiming this piece of prose: https://www.gothic.net/boards/showthread.php?t=11877

is a part of some study he is doing and our reaction to horrible prose somehow proves that Alex Jones is correct about....something. How does that make sense to you?
Like I said I had a few things to get off my mind,didn't say it was pretty.

Saya 11-01-2009 09:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05 (Post 577148)
Like I said I had a few things to get off my mind,didn't say it was pretty.
While you didn't exactly say it was pretty, you did compare it to POE.

Malice In Wonderland 11-02-2009 11:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan (Post 576428)
WHAT THE FUCK, MALICE!!
Those are the worst!
It worked before.

Saya 11-02-2009 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malice In Wonderland (Post 577321)
It worked before.
Not very well at all. I'm not exactly pining away for the days of hunting and gathering, when we lived to be thirty years old and I would not be sure which of the ten men who ***** me fathered my children.

Malice In Wonderland 11-02-2009 02:00 PM
I'd say I'm more of an idealist about it.
I'm not entirely sure it'd work in practice as it should in theory.
I don't see what's wrong with a hunter gatherer society, as long as everyone does their own bit.
And I don't see why being ***** would be any more common in a primitive society than in any other form of anarchism.

Saya 11-02-2009 02:07 PM
I can see it being unsustainable given the current population, not to mention the loss of quality of life, along with quantity.

As for r@pe, to be fair we don't really know. There are theories from evolutionary psychologists that because our ancestors r@ped it comes naturally to men today (and I don't need to say that I highly disagree with that view) and there are other theories that it was pretty common but matriarchal societies began with women banding together to protect themselves. Safety in numbers and technology.

Malice In Wonderland 11-02-2009 02:26 PM
I must say I'm not all for the idea of scrapping all technology, just not being completely dependant on it.
I also personally believe it could only happen as a post apocalypse war scenario, which isn't amazingly unlikely in my opinion.

Slap Your Love 11-02-2009 03:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05 (Post 577068)
When in fact you fail to see exactly where you are just as hypocritical.

(Anarcho-Communism) your chosen label by it's own merit is fucking Laughable.

Anarchy= A form of Government without Government.

Communism= A form of Government.

So what you're saying is Anarcho-Communism= A form of Government without Government,that ends up being a form of Government.

Meanwhile you seem to throw others views on the bonfire as "Stupid" and in which case you become the very thing you claim to fight against.

How in the fuck do you not see the Hypocrisy in that?

But to be fair I'll agree that I'm hypocritical,try and find a human being on this planet that isn't,that my friend is a true challenge.


I have no problem saying that all forms of Government are flawed and have little catch-22's that can turn into much bigger problems.

What about you though,is your answer for everyone or just what you've found to be the truth?

Which goes back to individual subjectivity of different things in life,just because it's your answer doesn't mean it's every ones answer.
I can say the same about what I feel is the truth,it is for me,but isn't for everyone else.
It's been awhile since I have seen a post with this amount of bullshit.

SweetJane 11-02-2009 03:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malice In Wonderland (Post 577362)
I must say I'm not all for the idea of scrapping all technology, just not being completely dependant on it.
I think any form of collectivism lends itself to this. I was thinking about this last night while watching cartoons with some friends at the independant media center. In a world without private property not everyone needs their own TV or their own phone or computer as long as there are places where everyone has equal access to those technologies.

Also, about the **** thing- Primitivism, in my opinion, lends itself easily to patriarchy, or at least to heirarchy and rigid gender roles.

Malice In Wonderland 11-02-2009 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetJane (Post 577381)
I think any form of collectivism lends itself to this. I was thinking about this last night while watching cartoons with some friends at the independant media center. In a world without private property not everyone needs their own TV or their own phone or computer as long as there are places where everyone has equal access to those technologies.

Also, about the **** thing- Primitivism, in my opinion, lends itself easily to patriarchy, or at least to heirarchy and rigid gender roles.
I think it's Neo-Ludditism, or something like that.
Not utterly technophobic, but not dependant or led by technology.

viscus 11-02-2009 05:12 PM
Could we drop a group of primitivists naked into the middle of the wilderness and let them figure out what a bad deal the state of nature is on their own?

PortraitOfSanity 11-02-2009 05:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by viscus (Post 577401)
Could we drop a group of primitivists naked into the middle of the wilderness and let them figure out what a bad deal the state of nature is on their own?
We could tape it and sell it for millions. That would be so fucking awesome.

the-nihilist 11-02-2009 05:49 PM
Anarcho-Neapolitan

Joker_in_the_Pack 11-02-2009 09:04 PM
Actually, women are not lower in status than men in hunter-gatherer societies. In fact, women are seen as equal. Hunting does not bring food with the regularity that gathering does. Since gathering is done by women, it makes them quite important. Agricultural life and Cattle Herding societies are the ones that create such a rigid patriarchy.

Saya 11-02-2009 09:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack (Post 577454)
Actually, women are not lower in status than men in hunter-gatherer societies. In fact, women are seen as equal. Hunting does not bring food with the regularity that gathering does. Since gathering is done by women, it makes them quite important. Agricultural life and Cattle Herding societies are the ones that create such a rigid patriarchy.
Which ones are we talking about? Quite a few have rigid patriarchy in that while women are important they still might not be seen as completely equal, and most if not all at least have prescribed gender roles, which is sexist in itself (you can't have "separate but equal").

viscus 11-02-2009 09:37 PM
It doesn't matter, relaxing under my electric blanket in my apartment in the dead of winter still beats shivering in a hut underneath animal fur.

Solumina 11-02-2009 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saya (Post 577461)
most if not all at least have prescribed gender roles, which is sexist in itself (you can't have "separate but equal").
This bothers me, a lot. You can have separate gender rolls that are still equal especially in a hunter-gatherer society as those gender rolls are prescribed mostly by physical ability such as men going after the large game because the women can't carry it back (yes I know there are some women who would be able to but men are stronger on average than women) and women take care of very young children as men can't breast feed. Saying you can't have "separate but equal" is fine as long as you are talking about separate versions of the same thing but that is not the case here. Especially since segregation was very strictly enforced and in most societies (hunter-gatherer or not) there is at least a bit of wiggle room with gender rolls.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:47 AM.
Page 5 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page