mistadubalina
Banned
^^^exactly...based on principles and ethics/morality i dont really see much difference and i doubt the state would either
Anarchism
- Thread starter nomadthethird
- Start date
vimothy
yurp
That's not quite what I said. At least, it isn't what I meant...
matt b
Indexing all opinion
to paraphrase:
"based on principles and ethics/morality that i've just made up, i can't really see any difference, but then i rarely manage a coherent argument"
D
droid
Guest
Well it kind of is. The need to use coercive violence surely suggests that an organisaiton is non-democratic and hierarchical?
Also - de-centralisation does not equate to non-hierarchical or autonomous. The Campanian Camorra in (excellent book btw) would be a good example of a de-centralised criminal organisation that still has a hierarchical structure. Terror cells would be another.
There are of course degrees of hierarchy.
Last edited by a moderator:
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
matt b
Indexing all opinion
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
mistadubalina
Banned
speak for yourself and with anarchy because in its purist form lacks order and leadership implies a sense of self governing and censorship
therefore i make my own rules and live by them, accept the consequences and fuck all y'all.
it is my right (as an anarchist should i choose to be) to do as i please for as long as i want to because without knowing my motive which for all intents and purposes is for the greater good is worthy of respect
so you can just STFU
matt b
Indexing all opinion
speak for yourself and with anarchy because in its purist form lacks order and leadership implies a sense of self governing and censorship
therefore i make my own rules and live by them, accept the consequences and fuck all y'all.
it is my right (as an anarchist should i choose to be) to do as i please for as long as i want to because without knowing my motive which for all intents and purposes is for the greater good is worthy of respect
so you can just STFU
you are a tit and have no understanding of what you're talking about
matt b
Indexing all opinion
vimothy
yurp
Terror cells would be the classic example. However, the distinction is a di-polarity not a di-chotomy: terror cells are flatter, but not flat. (Hyper modern groups like AQ are flatter still). And of course, the same is likely true for anarcho-syndicalist organisations (e.g. the CNT TU mentioned upthread).
I am using hierarchy in the sense of a vertical structure where subordinates link directly and only to superiors throughout and control flows from the top down down. I think the question of whether coercive violence in any specific instance was a reflection of a hierarchical structure depends on the specific instance rather than a general rule. Certainly, totalitarian state violence reinforces rigid hierarchies. But a paramilitary organisation might use coercive violence more than the state -- for a variety of reasons, in a variety of ways -- but it does not therefore follow that the paramilitary organisation is more hierarchical.
This is an insane thing to say. Who is Thatcher now? A dying old lady...
mistadubalina
Banned
eat dick bitch...
i have a perfect understanding of what I'M talking about its you that doesnt
but please lets not play tit for tat and upsizing the beef eh ? This is after all dissensus not consensus. We're not supposed to agree but rather respect the difference without the cheap insults yeah ?
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
A dying old lady who needlessly caused lots of pain to lots of people. A difference there. Why shouldn't we be happy she's dying? - don't think there's anything wrong with that per se. Not exactly like we can feel sorry for her immediate family either, is it?
Last edited:
matt b
Indexing all opinion
But your understanding is based upon what you think anarchism is, from an idea that came into your head, rather than from any reading of relevant materials.
Then stop jumping on threads and shouting rubbish. continually. after others have shown you are wrong.
Cheering death makes me uneasy.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
I'd agree with you in principle, absolutely. But there are some people the world will be better off without, and she fits into that (small) category. If you don't give any love to the world, you don't get any back. Karma, innit.
mistadubalina
Banned
oh bullshit...
if you're such an expert then define anarchism in your own words or shut the fuck up yourself!
....but you wont cos theres every chance youve got it all wrong
so how about you do you and I'll do me yeah ?
crackerjack
Well-known member
There's a very good chance she'll get a state funeral, the first PM since Churchill (who, for all his faults, was at least the right man at the right time). We're entitled to get our loathing in first.