Thread: Anarchy

What a beautiful, yet currently impossible concept.


I hate the way the world works. I hate western society. I hate the concept of monetary systems. It's all fucked up, pointless, and stupid. Most people at some point will have to exchange huge, non-refundable chunks of their life for meaningless slips of paper that enable them with the means to survive. If you do not have those silly digital numbers on a screen, or pieces of paper with scribbles on it that don't even represent what they were originally created for anyway, you're FUCKED. You will have a terrible life.

We're controlled by whatever the people with the most money want. The media? The news? People are lead to believe, and then begin to believe everything they are told. Like a bunch of sheep, they follow the leaders, and the masses. Then they can be scared into doing whatever the fuck the REAL people in charge want, while they pull the puppet strings of all the fucked up corrupt politicians that can now officially be LEGALLY bought off, with no cap amount.

Who the FUCK thought of all of this? We're slaves. It's not something you can run from, really, unless you want to be a hermit and live in some uninhabited place in the middle of nowhere.

Unfortunately, we're so deep into this system now, that there's really no way out of it. It would take some huge catastrophic event, or mass technological failure, or mastermind persuader like Hitler (For the idiots on this forum, I am not a Hitler enthusiast, I'm stating the fact that he was a brilliant minded persuasion and control artist) to snap us out of our routine.

Everything is so unfortunately, and perfectly circular. You have to pay for things in order to live. You have to waste your life away to pay for things. What's the point of life? We're not LIVING LIFE, god damnit. We are wasting away in our own filth and taking the rest of the world down with us.

Everything would have been better if anarchy had remained. Granted, if it were to break out now, it would be madness, I think. Absolute madness. Panic, chaos. But in time, people would evolve. You see, there would be no need for lies, and deception, and no opportunities for corruption. People would be free to expand their minds, free to live life how they see fit, without having to be bound to the chains of this fucked up society. Every fucked up society. I don't know what I"m getting at, I guess i'm just irate thinking about it.

I just read another thread about the legalization of corporations to donate to campaigns without a cap. That just set me off. It's hard to stay positive in the midst of such complete stupidity.

Everything would have been better if anarchy had remained.

Can you give me an example of a society, however small, that existed without
any means of governing themselves?

What do you consider, "living life?"

And, if you wish, you are always free to live the way people did before the rise
of modern currency. Away from the city in a more, shall we say, natural
environment. If you don't want to be a hermit, bring others with a similar
mindset with you.

Instead of wasting our time hunting, or making baskets or houses, we can
now waste our time doing other jobs demanded of us by the society,
however insignificant or otherwise they may seem. Nothing ever really
changed, we just came up with a standardized way of measuring our work,
even though it isn't perfect and it certainly is not proportional.

Originally Posted by Invader

Can you give me an example of a society, however small, that existed without
any means of governing themselves?

I suppose I wouldn't know, as I don't know much about history, but one must assume that humans slowly evolved into societies.

Originally Posted by Invader

And, if you wish, you are always free to live the way people did before the rise
of modern currency. Away from the city in a more, shall we say, natural
environment. If you don't want to be a hermit, bring others with a similar
mindset with you.

Yeah, that's realistic, and for the most part, that's still being a hermit. It's like being a hermit around other hermits.

Originally Posted by Invader

Instead of wasting our time hunting, or making baskets or houses, we can
now waste our time doing other jobs demanded of us by the society,
however insignificant or otherwise they may seem. Nothing ever really
changed, we just came up with a standardized way of measuring our work,
even though it isn't perfect and it certainly is not proportional.

That is an interesting way of looking at it, but as you pointed out, that depends on how you measure your time. I'd rather spend life, doing something I enjoy, and learning about my mind gaining insight and perspective, and furthering my knowledge. It's ridiculous that for me to say such a thing is now considered something unrealistic.

Some people love to work. My point is that we should be able to have the choice without having to sacrifice physiological needs, and risk our health, and lives to do so. But instead we are born into this system. Forced into it, where we are then surrounded by dumbed-down sheep who follow the word of the fearless leaders, who just want control. I'm not okay with that. It's ridiculous that for me to say such a thing is now considered something unrealistic, or impossible.

Originally Posted by Rainman

That is an interesting way of looking at it, but as you pointed out, that depends on how you measure your time. I'd rather spend life, doing something I enjoy, and learning about my mind gaining insight and perspective, and furthering my knowledge. It's ridiculous that for me to say such a thing is now considered something unrealistic.

What you need to consider is how our access to information has changed,
and how many outlets are now available for pursuing that which we like. One
may have found limited ways of going after a life of music, or mathematics,
or psychology 1,000 years ago. There were no snowboards or life support
systems or telescopes, and so on. So when you say, "furthering knowledge,"
what do you mean exactly? Although I don't necessarily disagree with you, I
do have to admit that being in this system is what allowed me to go to such
a place as a university in the first place, even though I'm going to be
screwed financially once I get out.

Some people love to work. My point is that we should be able to have the choice without having to sacrifice physiological needs, and risk our health, and lives to do so. But instead we are born into this system. Forced into it, where we are then surrounded by dumbed-down sheep who follow the word of the fearless leaders, who just want control. I'm not okay with that. It's ridiculous that for me to say such a thing is now considered something unrealistic, or impossible.

I'm not okay with it either, but I think humanity has behaved that way from
day one. Everyone has been born into whatever society with whatever rules
in which they would have to sacrifice their own desires in order to live at all.
The general masses aren't exactly motivated to change or take initiative,
which is one of the reasons we require leaders in the first place. An
anarchistic society would be possible in a world where no human had the
capacity for greed or power-hunger, or where all desired peace above all
else. That's a serious mentality change that most, unfortunately, are not
willing to change.

Anarchy is an interesting concept. It doesn't have to be a complete lack of federal power, as Universal Mind said in another thread if federal powers just disappeared every gang out there would grab their guns and go on a power rush. I don't know much about the subject myself, but ideas presented in these videos intrigue me.





As for the state of the world, I tend to agree with you. Our commercial culture in general is really starting to make me sick and the fact that I'm a 100% manufactured product of it doesn't help at all. I often question why we need all this. I guess on one hand its just a natural evolution of our human tendency to overpopulate. I've heard that without all this federal/commercial culture we can't sustain nearly this many people on Earth.

And what are we even moving towards? The only difference I see between us and cavemen is the fact that we live longer, get less exercise, and have inhibitions. And that we want to try to 'figure out' the universe (as though there's some magic linguistic dogma out there that can explain every intricacy of it). I'd rather just live half a life without the inhibitions. Fearing death is just absurd.

Still, I'm optimistic though. My friends and I often joke about starting an anarchist commune here in Vermont somewhere, maybe if we're lucky one day it'll actually happen . Try not to let the negativity get to you. Ever since the human ego came into its own things have been like this to some degree. Part of overcoming it is learning to accept the good and the bad for the facts they are, Taoist style. Any negative reactions is just that cultured ego talking .

Originally Posted by Speesh

Anarchy is an interesting concept. It doesn't have to be a complete lack of federal power, as Universal Mind said in another thread if federal powers just disappeared every gang out there would grab their guns and go on a power rush. I don't know much about the subject myself, but ideas presented in these videos intrigue me.

UM has a very twisted understanding of anarchy.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

UM has a very twisted understanding of anarchy.

Yeah, so does the dictionary.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy

an⋅ar⋅chy  /ˈænərki/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [an-er-kee] Show IPA

–noun 1.a state of society without government or law.2.political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy. 3.a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.4.confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.

edit, nevermind.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

–noun 1.a state of society without government or law.2.political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy. 3.a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.4.confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

3.a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.

Actually this is a good definition. This is what most people are advocating when they talk about anarchy in a political debate.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

UM has a very twisted understanding of anarchy.

and yet you have a very strange understanding of anarchy when compared to the works of a number of anarchist thinkers. I remember you as the anarcho-capitalist. Its not as simple as anarchy is this or anarchy is that. There are numerous different understandings of the term as is the case with all political distinctions. If i remember rightly you support the replacement of the state protection in the form of police with private militias that are hired with currency. To me that is one of the most absurd things I've ever heard attempt to be rationalized. and yet you call yourself an anarchists, when most anarchists would call you a capitalist pig. So there you see is the problem, anarchism is huge with many specific "denominations". Threads like this one, and the communism one should be more specific.

Originally Posted by imran_p

and yet you have a very strange understanding of anarchy when compared to the works of a number of anarchist thinkers. I remember you as the anarcho-capitalist. Its not as simple as anarchy is this or anarchy is that. There are numerous different understandings of the term as is the case with all political distinctions. If i remember rightly you support the replacement of the state protection in the form of police with private militias that are hired with currency. To me that is one of the most absurd things I've ever heard attempt to be rationalized. and yet you call yourself an anarchists, when most anarchists would call you a capitalist pig. So there you see is the problem, anarchism is huge with many specific "denominations". Threads like this one, and the communism one should be more specific.

For one, my statement was aimed at UM's belief that, in anarchy, peace, law, and order would be thrown out the window and society would become a clusterfuck of killings and immoral behavior -- a common belief whenever any sort of anarchist argument is put forth.

Second, I claim that the only way any sort of sustainable anarchy to occur is through the market process. That includes private security and the like. You call that absurd, I call it historically proven fact (in that people do use private security agencies when the monopolistic State security is cut back).

Also, I don't claim that there is only one type of "anarchy." I recognize that there are other schools of thought, ranging from anarcho-environmentalists to anarcho-feminists. I just think they are crazy and would never come to fruition.

Originally Posted by Rainman

What a beautiful, yet currently impossible concept.


I hate the way the world works. I hate western society. I hate the concept of monetary systems. It's all fucked up, pointless, and stupid. Most people at some point will have to exchange huge, non-refundable chunks of their life for meaningless slips of paper that enable them with the means to survive. If you do not have those silly digital numbers on a screen, or pieces of paper with scribbles on it that don't even represent what they were originally created for anyway, you're FUCKED. You will have a terrible life.

As fucked up as western society is, i would still prefer to live in a western society over just about any other there is.

rainman, in some respects i feel the same way as you do.

recently i've been thinking about the contribution of specialization to the current economics-driven, technocratic world.

though specialization in a society makes it easier for technological development (which in my opinion is seen as way way too fucking important in our culture), it forces us to pay to live, as you said.

when the division of labor into relatively isolated job skills is extended to the degree it is at now, each individual is forced into a situation where they depend almost entirely on others for survival. most people lack the skills needed to live (aside from working for money of course); we can't build a house, grow food or dig a well for water because we aren't taught how to do these things or given any real option to do so.


this kind of independence would maybe limit the control imposed on us externally better than anarchy would... just an idea.

Originally Posted by Rainman

What a beautiful, yet currently impossible concept.

I know where you're coming from, I believed in anarchy for about most of my life now. But there is a better form of government (or lack of thereof?) than anarchy - and I would call that the Natural Order

Who the FUCK thought of all of this?

It's interesting isn't it, if you actually take the time to ask people what would be their most idealistic life - what they consider to be a heavenly life, the systems we have in place are simply never involved. How did we come so far from what truly makes humanity happy? It didn't happen over night, but it is a tragedy that we support a life style that actually seems to contradict all that it means to be human

Unfortunately, we're so deep into this system now, that there's really no way out of it. It would take some huge catastrophic event, or mass technological failure, or mastermind persuader like Hitler (For the idiots on this forum, I am not a Hitler enthusiast, I'm stating the fact that he was a brilliant minded persuasion and control artist) to snap us out of our routine.

While it's true that it will take something HUGE to snap us collectively out of this boxed in lifestyle, that shouldn't stop YOU from seeking out the life you want to live. It's not an easy journey but it's worth it!

You have to pay for things in order to live. You have to waste your life away to pay for things. What's the point of life? We're not LIVING LIFE

What is the life then that you desire to live? How would you describe it in a few simple words? I would describe the life that I want to live as SELF-EXPRESSION

You see, there would be no need for lies, and deception, and no opportunities for corruption. People would be free to expand their minds, free to live life how they see fit, without having to be bound to the chains of this fucked up society. Every fucked up society. I don't know what I"m getting at, I guess i'm just irate thinking about it.

It's good that you can at least imagine a more positive future for mankind. If you can't, then you can't even imagine a positive future for yourself!

I just read another thread about the legalization of corporations to donate to campaigns without a cap. That just set me off. It's hard to stay positive in the midst of such complete stupidity.

It's absolutely disgusting! America has an infectious wound, and it's not going to get better until we peel off the bandaid and expose it.




This may or may not be the path for you, but have you heard of/researched permaculture? Applying permaculture in your life will help free you from being so dependent on the industrialized world. If you can grow your own food, then you're not going to starve just because you lack money.

Permaculture doesn't just apply to food production, but our homes as well. A well designed home that is designed with the environment in mind also frees your pocket. Anything that frees your pocket helps to liberate you from having to work a meaningless job.

You might want to read what does a house do, and why modern housing doesn't do it!

http://www.thinkgreenbuilding.com/Kn...20building.htm

"Housing is supposed to be a sublime temple of union between two ancient partners, the human and nature. That’s just not something you can hook up to a truck and pull off a parking lot. It’s also not something you can write a check for and plant haphazardly based on the locations of roads and shopping malls."

I mean, if you really, really want to free yourself from the industrialized world - YOU CAN. It'll take time and money. Time to research the alternatives out there. Time to learn these alternatives and time to learn how to apply them in your own life. You'll still need money. But the money is an investment. And how much money you need only depends on how luxurious you want to live.

Think about the rewards, if the house is truly yours - not owned by a company - imagine how this influences your monthly payment. What about the bills, water, elecricity? Permaculture! Permaculture! You'll produce your own electricity for your own personal needs. You'll catch rain water and learn how to reuse black water. Black water, icky I know. But your recycled water would still be cleaner then the recycled water coming out of your faucet now!!

If you really, I mean really apply permaculture and the best of green building, you get a lifestyle that is virtually free. And, if all hell does break lose, youre prepared.

Originally Posted by juroara

I know where you're coming from, I believed in anarchy for about most of my life now. But there is a better form of government (or lack of thereof?) than anarchy - and I would call that the Natural Order

Would you mind elaborating on this? The way I see it this is the Natural Order, there's just a group of uniformed thugs who drew some imaginary lines on a map and said MINE. I don't really see anarchy as a style of governing things, but rather an observation of reality(government is a belief).

We currently have power structures in place under the pretense of creating order, however these structure create more dis-order than order. Now if these were voluntary structures, contractual structures vs forced structures like we have now, they would just fall away because people would just stop paying taxes and form new governments(or syndicates if you prefer). But we have no choice under the current system. If we resist the system we get thrown in jail.

Originally Posted by stonedape

Would you mind elaborating on this? The way I see it this is the Natural Order, there's just a group of uniformed thugs who drew some imaginary lines on a map and said MINE. I don't really see anarchy as a style of governing things, but rather an observation of reality(government is a belief).

Think of it this way, technically speaking, yes everything is natural. So our arbitrary lines and claiming land is OURS is also natural.

I can't really define in any simple way what the Natural Order is. What I can tell you is Nature seems to prefer harmonious ecosystems, which is best illustrated by the constant flow of oxygen and carbon dioxide between ourselves and plants. Evolution is a very creative force, in that it creates so many different solutions to life, and not all of them are harmonious with other life forms living in the same environment.

What happens when a life form isn't living harmoniously with it's environment? It eventually goes extinct. In this way, while evolution tosses all sorts of solutions for survival, it is almost predestined to create the most harmonious ecosystem as possible. While we've described nature as being a dog eats dog world, the most successful and some of the oldest natural systems in place are completely harmonious with NO STRUGGLE (like predator and prey) with those involved. Such as the flowers and bees. Flowers like bees and bees like flowers. When you have a completely harmonious ecosystem, it's a win win situation for everyone.

The most archaic, the most basic and fundamental governing system that man has, isn't anarchy - it's understanding and consciously following that which I call the Natural Order. We are alive because our ancestors took the time to understand nature and her natural cycles, which eventually led to agriculture and all that we are today. I consider it a governing system, because understanding nature wasn't instinctual. It was learned, measured, trialed and tested, and then when something was understood - we concieved of it being a natural law that we should choose to follow!!

Einstein was right in that the fourth world war would be fought with sticks and stones. If all the governments of the world were to collapse, the anarchy that will spread will claim millions. But mankind will continue to go on. Because instinctually, out of a need to survive, we will be forced back into the Natural Order, and following the governing cycles of nature.

This is a grim future in my opinion - I am not advocating it. It took us a long time to gather the amount of knowledge we know today. And no single human being knows it all.

Going back to the Natural Order doesn't have to mean that we live like cavemen. All it means fundamentally is that we understand it and follow it. In the Natural Order - Earth comes first. Because without Earth we are nothing. What does this mean for our governments? What does this mean for the American government? The American government places capitalistic interests before its own people, and most definately before the Earth.

If it doesn't place the Earth first, it is out of touch with the Natural Order. Anything out of touch with the Natural Order is destined to go extinct - because that simply is the natural order of things. Which is why, all great empires eventually fall.

Anarchism is retarded for three main reasons:

- It is completely divided between anarcho-individualists, anarcho-communists, syndicalists, nihilists and so on. None of them can agree on 'what works'.

- It is hopelessley utopian. It assumes that some form of spark will be ignited within humanity, which will prevent them from forming coercive groups and establishing authorities.

- It is entirely theoretical. Anarchism has only ever been tried once, after the Spanish civil war. It failed, fast.

Anarchists are, pun intended, dreamers. They detach themselves from reality to envision a utopian society that, at best, would work in an optimistic computer simulation. There have been some truly great anarchists who have influenced modern ideologies. America is practically based on the individualist ideas of Max Stirner; but, alas, his other ideas fall far from the tree of rationale and practicality.

Originally Posted by drew

Anarchism is retarded for three main reasons:

Oh boy!

- It is completely divided between anarcho-individualists, anarcho-communists, syndicalists, nihilists and so on. None of them can agree on 'what works'.

How is this an argument against anarchism? If anything that could be an argument against any sort of current political theory (or even government itself) because, for example, you have Democrats, Greens, Republicans, Socialists, Independents, and Feminists that can never agree on "what works."

- It is hopelessley utopian. It assumes that some form of spark will be ignited within humanity, which will prevent them from forming coercive groups and establishing authorities.

Ever heard of private security?

Authority is not really a problem unless it's coercive and involuntary. If someone contractually and voluntarily agrees to be under some sort of authority, there is no problem.

- It is entirely theoretical. Anarchism has only ever been tried once, after the Spanish civil war. It failed, fast.

I suppose anarchism in Iceland and Ireland just never existed, then.

Anarchists are, pun intended, dreamers. They detach themselves from reality to envision a utopian society that, at best, would work in an optimistic computer simulation. There have been some truly great anarchists who have influenced modern ideologies. America is practically based on the individualist ideas of Max Stirner; but, alas, his other ideas fall far from the tree of rationale and practicality.

Do you think the Constitution is a good idea? Or rather, do you think limited government can work?

Originally Posted by Rainman

Everything would have been better if anarchy had remained. Granted, if it were to break out now, it would be madness, I think. Absolute madness. Panic, chaos

Disorder and chaos will always remain, despite our efforts to keep up the order. Fortunatetly, there is nothing inherently evil or bad in chaos or madness. There is danger, of course, but it has nothing to do with evil. So why should we be afraid of chaos or anarchy? People are just not accustomed to change or flow, they seek haven from order. Despite the order, you feel miserable and bad. How sad.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

It is clear imran_p seems to value Earth over humanity (X over Y), especially when he says thing such as:

Okay. Let's take a look at this bit by bit, shall we?

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

It is clear imran_p seems to value Earth over humanity (X over Y), especially when he says thing such as:especially when he says thing such as:

If humanity dies out then the planet will heal.

That's called a fact. If A happens, B will happen. There is no opinion expressed there, -1 for you.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

...Humanity has so much potential but its failing, the sooner we fuck off, the quicker this beautiful planet can begin to regenerate and the natural world can re assert itself in vast areas where it has had to recede...

While poorly phrased, it's merely an observation which doesn't necessarily mean that he values the life of the Earth over the life of the human race.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Let us pray that this day arrives sooner rather than later, no?

I believe in following posts, imran clarified that this isn't what he meant, and may have even said he takes that back, but I'm too lazy to actually read back for that. This has been clarified.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Even our very existence is a problem. The largest and most serious problem facing humanity is one that isn't too often talked about; overpopulation. We breed and breed, and keep multiplying, moving across vast areas of lands destroying the natural environment and forcing the wildlife to disappear, stripping the land of its natural resources.

Again, facts and observations. All of these things are true. Where's the "x over y?" These are all true statements...

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

And I also think you overestimate humanity. We are a cancer. We wont disappear in my life time, but when we do, it will be for the greater good.

Again, an observation. The way we behave is similar to a cancer. Here he restates his point that the Earth would be healthier without humans, which again, is true. So, what you're doing is analyzing a list of FACTS and OBSERVATIONS that are true, and deciding for him what his views are based on those facts and observations.

Even if he does think those things, you have no clear evidence of that, thus making any statement that arrogantly claims what he believes is, by definition, an ASSERTION, and that's all that my point was. So yes, those, whether they are correct or incorrect, are still assertions. Sorry.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

One does not need openly hostile obscenities to tell if someone is agitated, irritated, angry, or mad. You're saying statements such as, "pay attention, you're not good at this, say something factual." You're being hostile.

Yes, in this and in that post, I was being mildly hostile. However, the post before that was the one you were accusing of being hostile, which, first of all, is using a completely separate post than the one to which your argument refers, and second of all, that post was not in any way hostile, and if you feel that it was, then that's your problem entirely. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Originally Posted by Unelias

Disorder and chaos will always remain, despite our efforts to keep up the order. Fortunatetly, there is nothing inherently evil or bad in chaos or madness. There is danger, of course, but it has nothing to do with evil. So why should we be afraid of chaos or anarchy? People are just not accustomed to change or flow, they seek haven from order. Despite the order, you feel miserable and bad. How sad.

I actually agree with that. The chaos idea doesn't really frighten me, and I don't even think it would be all that much of a chaos after a while. I think if there was an event that caused anarchy, such as a large scale disaster, after all of the dust settles, people would start to behave normally. Maybe a few years or so, but I think in general, crime and such only exists for the MOST part, not entirely, but largely because of all of the fucked up aspects of the system.

How the Fed, and other central banks of nations fuck over every single citizen of that country and others. How you've got to work to live. Just those two alone would be enough to send even the best of people into a blowing point. Without money, there would be so much less crime. Even if we forget about complete anarchy and just say get rid of money, there would be so much less reason for crime to exist. Of course, there are obvious other factors that would be grounds for believing that crime would still exist on a noticible level, but like I said, give it a few years or so, and everyone will adjust.

So I don't feel that "chaos" is even the right term. Depending on your definition of anarchy, which I haven't given a lot of thought to specifically, there wouldn't necessarily be any chaos.

Originally Posted by Rainman

What a beautiful, yet currently impossible concept.


I hate the way the world works. I hate western society. I hate the concept of monetary systems. It's all fucked up, pointless, and stupid. Most people at some point will have to exchange huge, non-refundable chunks of their life for meaningless slips of paper that enable them with the means to survive. If you do not have those silly digital numbers on a screen, or pieces of paper with scribbles on it that don't even represent what they were originally created for anyway, you're FUCKED. You will have a terrible life.

We're controlled by whatever the people with the most money want. The media? The news? People are lead to believe, and then begin to believe everything they are told. Like a bunch of sheep, they follow the leaders, and the masses. Then they can be scared into doing whatever the fuck the REAL people in charge want, while they pull the puppet strings of all the fucked up corrupt politicians that can now officially be LEGALLY bought off, with no cap amount.

Who the FUCK thought of all of this? We're slaves. It's not something you can run from, really, unless you want to be a hermit and live in some uninhabited place in the middle of nowhere.

Unfortunately, we're so deep into this system now, that there's really no way out of it. It would take some huge catastrophic event, or mass technological failure, or mastermind persuader like Hitler (For the idiots on this forum, I am not a Hitler enthusiast, I'm stating the fact that he was a brilliant minded persuasion and control artist) to snap us out of our routine.

Everything is so unfortunately, and perfectly circular. You have to pay for things in order to live. You have to waste your life away to pay for things. What's the point of life? We're not LIVING LIFE, god damnit. We are wasting away in our own filth and taking the rest of the world down with us.

Everything would have been better if anarchy had remained. Granted, if it were to break out now, it would be madness, I think. Absolute madness. Panic, chaos. But in time, people would evolve. You see, there would be no need for lies, and deception, and no opportunities for corruption. People would be free to expand their minds, free to live life how they see fit, without having to be bound to the chains of this fucked up society. Every fucked up society. I don't know what I"m getting at, I guess i'm just irate thinking about it.

I just read another thread about the legalization of corporations to donate to campaigns without a cap. That just set me off. It's hard to stay positive in the midst of such complete stupidity.

i agree with pretty much everything you said. i dont see what the next step is in all this? surely it isnt good though.