Regarding the question about how the “economy and production” should be managed to serve the communes best: In my opinion, I don’t think anarchism could work on a huge scale. The communes would have to be very small. This way the people in the community know eachother and what they need. To go on a larger scale would be too chaotic for a group of people to keep track of everything.
Dominic () - 27 10 08 - 14:40

Q1. Global Anarchy. We can’t just have an anarchist area. Governments would attempt to take that area over. If somebody tried to create a government in an anarchist society, it would be stopped.
Q2. I wouldn’t stop counter revolution unless it infringed upon me, like the creation of a government.
Q3. As an anarchist, I don’t set out to stop people from speaking their thoughts (propagandising their ideology). I mean to change (through education, not forcing my ideas) conformed people into people who see that they don’t have to change their thoughts and actions because it’s what the rest of the people are doing.
Q3. (Part Two) Wouldn’t the communities know what they need better than some large corporation? I would think so.
Q4. I’ve seen quick military decisions made. THAT LEADS TO MORE QUICK MILITARY DECISIONS. Maybe we won’t make a quick decision, but we’ll sure as hell make the right one. AND! If the commune is small enough, direct democracy may actually be possible. Also, refer back to Q1.
Q5. We don’t have to follow an anarchists leaders’ orders like we have to with governmental figures.
Q6. Who said anything about no hiearchy in the workplace?
Q7. I don’t riot against the police when they’re not being corrupt. Don’t assume all anarchists do.
Q8. Participation in the parliament? WTH is that? Like British voting? Well, I live in America and I don’t vote because it does not determine the outcome of the election. Our elections are decided by the Electoral College. You’d be surprised how many American’s don’t know that.
Q9. In the world’s history, all communist areas have had a government. I think that would be a difference between communism and anarchy. However, I’m defining communism by what it HAS been, not by what it should be.
Violence is never necessary.
[Kaleb] () - 28 10 08 - 12:58

Interesting video. Good question; bad manners.
I’m not sure whether he was trying to argue from his views or the media’s. Either way, he is still misled.
I do not attack the law enforcement, I simply ignore their attempts at establishing peace.
He has unfairly generalized us.
The Spectator () (URL) - 30 10 08 - 17:55

I think the questions are a bit “outside” of anarchy. We’d still have bosses where we work, councils for “laws” and “morals.” people so often forget that anarchy is not chaos, but a set standard of rules decided on from the people. If another region attacks, couldn’t the people fight back?

And yes….very bad manners….another high school/college student trying to make a point without knowing all the facts.
Ty - 04 11 08 - 13:26

Good questions, i congrat you for this post
Q1: imagine a regular army that receives an emboscade from the enemy, who quickly identify the leader and kill him, I don’t think that the squad should sourrender and I don’t think they will have enough time to choose a new leader… they must organize themselves as they can, apply comradery principle that means sacrifice oneself for another,
if on that situation a non anarchist squad can organize a self defense without a leader, why should an anarchist group should not do that?
Q2: anarchism means freedom, equality and fraternity and of course non-authoritarianism. so, anarchism is not a rigid though, any ideology should be accepted and, without violent manners if it is wrong it should be tried to be correctet by reason education (no brainwash, no torture…) and why not to learn from it if that though have productive elements
the CR one should be:
a. the one(s) who tries to establish any way of government in the organization
b. the one(s) who don’t do anything productive to the group and want to live by the work of the rest ones
c. the adulator(s)
Q3: answer; federations. Global anarchism working in a descentralized form (each community should have their own problems, apart of the general problems)
Q4: answered in Q2
Q5: we should not need extraordinary material conditions, but a minimum necessary should be reached by (a) clandestine economy, (b) taking property off the hands of exploiters and/or white neck thieves and put it at administration and serve to all the comunity. FREEDOM OVER EFFICIENCE
Q6: direct democracy, huge debate and constant anarchist-like co-education (i add these two last points because there are cases when people don’t know clearly what do they want or what do they need)

about syndicalism: in real life syndicates use to ask for limosnes from the state, or by deffect from capitalists, and them use to have their leader(s)

anarchism is bult over the base of individual/collective freedom, communism does not consider freedom (just in the speech) and it keeps the superstructure built during the ‘proletariat’ dictatorship (marxism teaches that the state should be irrelevant (?) not that it dissapears)

on the road to communism though by marxism, i don’t understand how does a superstructure built over the masses “on their service” with almost absolute power, having abolishing all disicence and social classes will magically evaporate?. That’s why i am not a communist

For me, violence is not necesary but in a close future violence should be unnavoidable cuz i don’t thing that the ones who hold power should leave it voluntarialy without possibility to retake it.

I have an additional question.
what happens if a bad member of an anarchist organization is very respected at the group
(maybe because everyone things that the group has not a good image at the eyes of the society because of external propaganda, but not because of the actions of that unescrupulous member who receives money from child proxenets or drugs trafficers as the result of pacts with them or who attack innocent people during the riots)? how can the other members of the organization take notice of his behavior without falling on the temptation of missthrust and vigilate each others?
sorry if my question is too long, i am making an effort to ask it clearly.
Thanks,
Meurssault
Meurssault - 30 11 08 - 03:46