The problem with being an anarchist, I've realised,
is that the most brutal arseholes with the best access to hefty weaponry would end up on top, after a prolonged agony of starvation, misery and grief.
So we can't just withdraw, howevermuch loathing we feel.
It ain't easy.
( ,
Wed 7 Apr 2010, 10:22,
archived)
So we can't just withdraw, howevermuch loathing we feel.
It ain't easy.
Oddly enough, yes.
I have free access to the same dental miracle-worker who caters for Tony Blair and Robbie Savage.
And I still get to throw Molotov Cocktails.
( ,
Wed 7 Apr 2010, 10:29,
archived)
And I still get to throw Molotov Cocktails.
you can still have police, welfare and general organisation in anarchy
there just aren't the individual points of accountability that form in a hierarchical system. but on the flip side- ever tried to get something done by consensus?
( ,
Wed 7 Apr 2010, 11:01,
archived)
Do the policemen ad lib it, and enforce laws they make up themselves?
You'd think they'd arrest each other a lot, for kidnapping people.
Alternatively they could just ask people nicely to stop doing things, in which case a policeman would be anybody who likes whinging.
( ,
Wed 7 Apr 2010, 11:28,
archived)
Alternatively they could just ask people nicely to stop doing things, in which case a policeman would be anybody who likes whinging.
given how hard it is to get consensus on anything, very probably
i once met a guy who had done security at buddhafield. the job basically involves hugging miscreants until they repent
( ,
Wed 7 Apr 2010, 11:37,
archived)