Thread: Is anarchy a good idea? How could it work?

Originally Posted by Occipitalred

To be honest, I am shocked by all these negative responses Universal Mind has been getting. What has he written before to deserve this? (Rhetoric).

Yes, his scenario was poor, I admit, but his question remains valid.

I would like to know more about anarchism. Maybe I sounded ignorant by humoring hopes for a future utopia. Maybe that sounds like innocent babbles from the perspective of well-read anarchists. But, I have a genuine hope that I could gain some type of enlightenment on the subject from this thread.

(And hopefully, this thread won't turn into a suggestion against anarchy.)

Thanks, although I think my scenario provides an ideal ground for discussing what would and would not happen without a government/state. I didn't create this thread just for me. I figured that there would be people who want to understand anarchy better and would read the thread. Original Poster and Descensus both claim that they are anarchists, but I have never been able to get them to explain the detailed mechanics of their ideas of anarchy. They get pissed off at me on a personal level for trying to understand their ideas (not just about anarchy), and they don't explain them, even for the other people reading the threads. It makes it look like they have doubts and lack answers.

Original Poster says he is an anarcho-socialist, and Descensus says he is an anarcho-capitalist. They could be discussing a lot with each other and giving perspectives to everybody reading the thread. However, I am their only topic, and that is typical.

This thread is not supposed to be about me or primarily for me. It is supposed to be about anarchy and for people who want to learn about it.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

I don't usually find much benefit in viewing your posts, and this is no exception. Do you even know who Emma Goldman is? Because I haven't seen her name come up once in this thread. That's like debating on communism without mentioning Marx, or debating objectivism without bringing up Ayn Rand. So again, I repeat, you don't know what anarchism is and this thread is irrelevant regarding actual anarchism. But sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt your display of ignorance, please continue. I'll just see myself out.

Well, this is unfair - he never claimed to understand anarchism and this thread is only irrelevant if (almost) nobody takes it upon themselves to explain.
I too am ignorant and with two actual anarchists on the board it's a true pity we don't get actual answers to reasonable questions from that quarter.
Shall I look up Emma Goldman and copy paste what I find, or will you find it within yourself to explain in your own words?

Goes to Descensus as well, except it's truly so that you've been through this extensively with him zig times before - but please then - give us links to these threads, it must have happened before my time/beyond my notice.

There are indeed interested readers, surely beyond the active membership as well, why not make your actual points for the benefit of everybody else, if anarchism is truly close to your hearts?
This thread is not primarily to get UM to agree it's a good thing - but maybe others might come to that conclusion, if you gave them the chance?

Why not take the questions as they are and forget who asked them? How can that be more relevant for you than having a platform for an important and fascinating topic with interested people?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Thanks, although I think my scenario provides an ideal ground for discussing what would and would not happen without a government/state. I didn't create this thread just for me. I figured that there would be people who want to understand anarchy better and would read the thread. Original Poster and Descensus both claim that they are anarchists, but I have never been able to get them to explain the detailed mechanics of their ideas of anarchy. They get pissed off at me on a personal level for trying to understand their ideas (not just about anarchy), and they don't explain them, even for the other people reading the threads. It makes it look like they have doubts and lack answers.

Original Poster says he is an anarcho-socialist, and Descensus says he is an anarcho-capitalist. They could be discussing a lot with each other and giving perspectives to everybody reading the thread. However, I am their only topic, and that is typical.

This thread is not supposed to be about me or primarily for me. It is supposed to be about anarchy and for people who want to learn about it.

Yeah indeed, shame that!
I go blue in the face at your posts from time to time as you know, but what on earth did you do in this thread to deserve this condescension?
Overdoing the initial example? Is that a reason to boycott a whole topic and lots of justified questions you're bringing up?
Nope - childish behaviour.