View Single Post
Old 02-29-2012, 07:02 PM
Untoward_Parable Untoward_Parable is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 656
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
Including that one.

So now your anarchist, no-government, coercion-free society has a "mechanism" to get people to abrogate their self-interest in the name of the larger good. See Ayn Rand's "We The Living". My point is that we have ample evidence from experience that forced "unselfishness" is as great or greater an evil than "unresticted private power".
How about no control at all? Isn't that the literal definition of an-archy? You seem to be defining (see top of post ) anarchy as "That system that will prevent the reestablishment of privately based oligarchic power". Again, libertarians don't want feudalism and they don't want OmniCorp. They want a non-coercive society.
The looting mob is actually an improvement over the People's Committe.
Ararchism may not have a definite tradition to specify it's tenets however you like many in this thread begin by focusing on a very rare and unpopular version which begins and ends it's understanding with a Webster's dictionary.

Ararchism is not a literal translation of the root elements of the word anymore than any political philosophy is.

If you would like to excerpt the portions of Ayn Rand's argument and evidence you'd like me to consider go on ahead. I haven't looked deeply at her work but from what I have she always struck me as th ultimate narcissist, psychopathic and absurd, useless in any context other than as fodder for performance art, or as an honest expression of viewpoints to be feared by the 99.99%. (The 0.001% are the serial killers).

Here is an excerpt from an article by Chomsky on the issue, you can go through the rest of the article if you like and won't find much of this "no-government, coercion-free society" stuff you're referring to unless you quote out of context.

"Anarchosyndicalists sought, even under capitalism, to create "free associations of free producers" that would engage in militant struggle and prepare to take over the organization of production on a democratic basis. These associations would serve as "a practical school of anarchism."20 If private ownership of the means of production is, in Proudhon's often quoted phrase, merely a form of "theft" -- "the exploitation of the weak by the strong"21 -- control of production by a state bureaucracy, no matter how benevolent its intentions, also does not create the conditions under which labor, manual and intellectual, can become the highest want in life. Both, then, must be overcome.

In his attack on the right of private or bureaucratic control over the means of production,, the anarchist takes his stand with those who struggle to bring about "the third and last emancipatory phase of history," the first having made serfs out of slaves, the second having made wage earners out of serfs, and the third which abolishes the proletariat in a final act of liberation that places control over the economy in the hands of free and voluntary associations of producers (Fourier, 1848).22 The imminent danger to "civilization" was noted by de Tocqueville, also in 1848:

As long as the right of property was the origin and groundwork of many other rights, it was easily defended -- or rather it was not attacked; it was then the citadel of society while all the other rights were its outworks; it did not bear the brunt of attack and, indeed, there was no serious attempt to assail it. but today, when the right of property is regarded as the last undestroyed remnant of the aristocratic world, when it alone is left standing, the sole privilege in an equalized society, it is a different matter. Consider what is happening in the hearts of the working-classes, although I admit they are quiet as yet. It is true that they are less inflamed than formerly by political passions properly speaking; but do you not see that their passions, far from being political, have become social? Do you not see that, little by little, ideas and opinions are spreading amongst them which aim not merely at removing such and such laws, such a ministry or such a government, but at breaking up the very foundations of society itself?23

The workers of Paris, in 1871, broke the silence, and proceeded

to abolish property, the basis of all civilization! Yes, gentlemen, the Commune intended to abolish that class property which makes the labor of the many the wealth of the few. It aimed at the expropriation of the expropriators. It wanted to make individual property a truth by transforming the means of production, land and capital, now chiefly the means of enslaving and exploiting labor, into mere instruments of free and associated labor."

Link to full article on Anarchism by Chomsky.

Last edited by Untoward_Parable; 02-29-2012 at 07:05 PM.