Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm definitely an anarchist, but thinking of anarchism as a "political ideology" gets the meanings very convoluted and misunderstood."Anarchist government" really makes absolutely no sense at all.
Really I just don't like the current style of governance. I don't like nation states, I don't like the fact that our mono-culture is so dominant over every species, every culture, and every person in all areas of the planet. I don't like the fact that we've been forced to comply with such a barbaric system of governance, and accept it like it's somehow righteous. Capitalism to me implies exploitation on a larger level, but honestly communism on a nation-state level is both impossible and really not a great alternative.

Humans are dominant because nation states are dominant. Without a larger society and a large agricultural base such an endeavour is impossible. Population expansion only takes place, and only can take place if you have those conditions. Nation states are the reason we're dominant. Intelligence has maybe a little bit to do with that but really not very much. It probably came about mostly as a series of accidents and continued on a different trajectory, all the while little accomplishments popping up to make the whole thing more bearable.

Anarchism doesn't have to be barbaric at all. Like I said, it's not really an ideology. It's mostly just... really, really counter-culture. And no matter what, a level of group solidarity is necessary for people to survive. The kind we have right now is one that thrives on exploitation, and that's the reason I say ******** that.
At the current rate of resource consumption and destruction, many nation states are absolutely going to collapse. The question is only when they do. I'm personally looking forward to it. I only wish I didn't have to wait so long. I'm getting tired.

It's been said many times in just as many ways: Anarchy=/=Chaos. Anarchy means "without rulers." In a proper Anarcho-Syndicalist/Democratic Socialist society, because everyone has equal power and equal say, there are no "rulers" in the classic sense. Everyone's a ruler, and therefore no-one is. ... My train of thought has just derailed, careened into a ravine, and exploded. sweatdrop

Absolutely. It's completely necessary. Anarchism is kind of centred around that actually. The idea of setting up the means to survive outside of larger culture.

I kinda just think of bands of people surviving and using their own skills as needed or as desired. I was wondering... have you ever stayed in a punk house? If not, you should. It's amazing.

Close to where I live there was this huge community of people who built cabins on the shoreline and lived their own separate lives, doing what they needed to do to subsist. After a while the local government caught on and all of these people were forced from their homes. Many committed suicide. It was terribly tragic and this happens everywhere we look.
People should just be able to survive as is demanded. Cultures should be able to live without one dominating over all others. I don't like the idea of there being one set way of life, regardless of what it actually entails. I find it kind of disgusting actually, as well as systems that take the livelihood away from others.

who ever said appeal to everyone? that's one of the reasons I'm against large super-power nations; they control so much territory, and rule over such large populations. we needn't govern in such large ranges. let smaller and smaller territories and the populations living there govern themselves as they will. I agree, money itself isn't the problem.

but regardless of whether money is the problem or not, capitalism IS all about greed. it is a system where everything is centered around profit, and none of the actual human needs are taken into account other than to keep the system alive. the bare minimum that the government ad/or corporations can get away with is all that's ever realy given to the People. and not even to everyone! far too many are just left to fall through the cracks...

and adding socialist ideas for the sake of maintaining the capitalist system will only make things worse. beuracracy, subsidies, registrations of everything... nobody will have any privacy, nobody will have the rights to anything that is theirs. there will be no real security.

capitlist socialism is the direction america is already headed, and I hate it. there may be Equality, but at lack of Liberty and Security. we need Liberty, Equality, AND Security.

capitalism came about in the feudal age, after money had already been invented. so your right, money itself isn't the problem. but capitalism IS greed, and it IS the problem. and at this point, I think they only way to realy fight capitalism is to fight money. the way money works in the world has evolved to a point where we can't go back anymore. but we CAN return to a Resource-Based economy, and from their the bater-system can allow us to eventually move to another system of money. and it would be useful, but we'd have to remember not to reinstate capitalism.

Socialism on a Syndicist level is more beneficial than on a buerocratic level. Tribal Communes are some of the most effective and proper systems of Social Order. everyone within the Tribe/Commune/Syndicate/Clan shares what they have. everyone plays their part. everyone looks out for everyone else. everyone benefits. the only reason we don't see alot ofthese is because the ones that are known about get exploited, used, and eventually adopted into the fold of the super-power nations and their governments. hell, even alot that we DON"T know about do! if the super-powers weren't around to bother them, these Tribes would continue to live and THRIVE!

Whatever system you talk about, there will always be exploits and dangers...

That's part of the reason we are where we are at today...

The system you talk of will always have the danger of charismatic individuals rising up for whatever reason, and a small majority joining their cause with this charismatic soul, leading to a majority against a minority. Even in the most well meaning scenario.

In the end people take sides, the smaller groups of people join with others of like minds and then you eventually have what we have now again. It's not anything you can ever stop from happening, because the way of things is, when you start something it will either grow or die...

The only way around that is to have a one world government, in which the government itself is only there to be sure that each area concerns itself with itself. A system to be sure that the charismatic folks who believe they have a better way, or who just want more for themselves stay silent... but you see how that would get out of hand pretty quick....

Yet, that is what we are moving towards right now. We are a world of essentially 4 factions, with the rest of the populous riding along. Yes, I agree it's a problem, but if we went to the anarchy you talk about, we would work ourselves back here eventually.

Now, as for the major players in the world government arena...It would pretty much be only 2 factions if some certain governments would get their heads out of their butts and deal with the 1, but then 2 factions would be joined as one, and one would be eliminated, thus starting a war between them and the 4th.... which actually sounds mighty like a couple prophesies I know.... now I am curious to see it play out....

As for me, I don't believe your system would work like you think it would, but that doesn't mean that I have faith in the system we have either.

Technically, in the USA, our system could possibly be made substantially better if we eliminated allot of the authority the president has, such as the ability to declare war with no real support, or to overturn voted measures in place by executive decision. Then by returning the power that the states were originally supposed to control back to the states, plus some. And finally, by eliminating corporate influence altogether from the government.

A significant pay cut to all representative positions would also help by making the positions less desirable to those who are in it for the money, but a significant amount of those would be out the door when you outlawed corporate influence.

It doesn't exist because of corporations, that is something that has worked it's way in over time. The original fundamental structure of our Government was built in such a way as to try and separate the government completely from corporate influence, before there were even corporations as we know them now. Much of what goes on on Capitol Hill is unconstitutional, and illegal, but that is because our government has too much power.

What should be done is a revolution back to the fundamentalist structure of the constitution. A movement to eliminate all of the illegal activities our congress participates in, and remove any fundamentally unconstitutional amendments and practices. Then the Judicial System and The Executive Branch need a major overhaul...restructuring, and limiting of how far they can change the issues we vote on, and how much law they can institute without the Legislature.

The legislature was implemented to be the main lawmaking authority, but over the years, the Judicial system has been thrust into that position. The legislative branch has become a mockery of what it should be, and it has been stepping onto the executive branch's territory. The excutive branch has become a mostly diplomatic seat, and when it does step into it's original territory, it seems to be in an abusive way. It's all effed up, but it actually is a good system when held in check.

What's happening to us happened to Rome. The system instituted some major glory days. It gave it's implementers a rise to success, but the people who benefited from the system grew complacent, figuring the system would take care of itself. Then they realized their folly too late to do anything about it. Would they have done anything if they had noticed the power-hungry madmen that had risen to power sooner. I am starting to think the answer is 'No'....

Yeah, that's why I conceded long ago that we need to tame the wild beast....

It's hard work to bring an animal under control, and it's usually dangerous too... but it can be done... but it takes will-power and constant attention from the point you decide to do so to the day that animal dies to be sure that it doesn't go feral again.

It's the same with government and economics, and society is like a child who grows overconfident with the taming of their animal. We get tired of watching it, and taking care of it, so it begins to go feral on us again. Then we wonder why.

Any system that benefits us all is going to take allot more work than the systems that benefit a few, because it will take more people being involved in the monitoring of how far the system can go, and it will take allot of work to be sure that the system doesn't gain too much momentum.

We at least understand that the system is ailing and broken.... Let's face it, most people don't want to take the time to understand this stuff, and they brag that they failed the classes in school. They just want to put in their 40, have the weekend off for bar hopping, or lawn-mowing, or whatever mundane thing whets their whistle, and then blame somebody else when things aren't the way they like... And that my friend is why things are is the state they are in now.... and, That's what upsets me the most.