not nom
Well-Known Member
There have never been any functional anarchical societies. That IS the real world.
nah, just your pitiful corner of it. it's not even true there, but hey.
In discussions with modern anarchists, they propose all sorts of actual municipal or communal works in their dream Anarchy, but nobody would actually participate in such things if anarchy were instituted somewhere, because in lawless situations, humans go wild and revert back to 'kill or be killed'. Every time. It simply won't work.
again, speak for yourself and the clowns you're dealing with. I'll say one thing though, what chomsky pointed out, "many who consider themselves left I would consider proto-fascist". I've seen the stupid, hypocritical underbelly of anarchos, sure -- but I've also seen just how easy and natural it can be. that it can literally be the absence of violence, coercion and lies, and nothing more. you say that's not viable? it surely is more viable than all alternatives combined.
oh, and speaking of chomsky, what about northern italy after ww2 -- self-organized by workers, the US preparing to attack if should the italians refuse to elect a government (because they seemed to get along fine without one, which scared them ******** haha)?
when I point it out, you cover your ears and go lalala. that doesn't mean anarchism doesn't work, it just means it's not for you, and you not for it. **** northern italy in the 40s, ponder the pedestrians at the red traffic light. or don't. but don't tell me about "the real world" as if that phrase was anything but compensation for arguments.
Last edited: