Varoius Critique's of Anarchism

98 posts / 0 new
Last post
Joined: 14-04-04
May 4 2004 15:37

I am doing my phd now. The posts arent meant to be worthy of publication.

Im sure I could find some typos of your own.

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Joined: 6-11-03
May 5 2004 10:13
Well you or anyone else cannot know how many people were in the ALF, or if they were MI5 agents, because it is predicated on ot knowing, due to its cell structure.

Actually there was a programme made a little while back with the specific consent of MI5 which mentioned in passing that there were (and I entirely acknowledge my memory may not be dead-on here) 15 active (i.e going out and causing trouble) members of the ALF and approx 30 infiltrators.

They are violent nutters; there just isnt enough of them. If there was, they probably would have done that.

Yes but there aren't, which is the point. They don't get enough support even now to make them truly dangerous, what makes you think they'd find the requisite numbers in Anarchism?

she thinks prostitution IS work.

Then if she's willing to work she won't mind doing the small number of jobs she's expected to do by everyone else. If she's willing to work she's willing to work, if she isn't she isn't. Make your mind up.

Because its boring, and I want to consume, not ridiculous levels of rubbish, but at least a little beyond my 'needs'.

Indeed. Couldn't have said it better myself.

so if differential wages served to further this goal

But they don't. They promote gross inequality and deny the majority a large percentage of that 'comfortable life' you mention. This isn't (in the UK at least) a matter of 'need' in some cases I agree, it is a matter of feeedom, equality and a less barbarous society.

Who has the 'gun' to my head? My landlord? My bank?

It was based on your example of a prostitute and her male followers trying to dominate a village/town/city by force in order to set her up as a kind of queen prostitute so she didn't have to do any work except that (why does that sound like such a silly concept confused). My point was that the rest of the population would not admire her for holding a gun to their heads, just as you wouldn't admire people if they did it to you now. It had nothing to do with bankers I don't know where you got that from.

isnt this what people signing on are doing?

On occasion yes, but then again, they're not taking millions (or even billions) per head, and many of them would work given the choice. The point is that most people have the option to go on the dole tomorrow, but they don't.

Errr... so the fact that millions of workers tried to apply anarchism and failed, has no bearing upon anarchist praxis?

That wasn't the example you were using. You were talking about a specific incident involving a singer and a small group of anarchs. But while we're on the subject no it doesn't. There was a 2000 year period in which the cause of democracy made no concrete strides whatsoever. There was a period in which India rose up against imperialist Britain and failed. I fail to see why one or even several failures should be regarded as evidence that a concept itself is impossible.

I am doing my phd now.

Ah right gotcha, my apologies evidently I was being unfair.