Anarchy could never work.

Post Reply New Topic

Uhh my point is most animals do not have the same mental abilities as humans.....the instinctual part of their brains tend to be large then the parts that would be more for intelligence, thinking things through ect that humans have more of. So there is no need for us to be living like wild animals if that's not what we are......if you wanna argue that is all we are and deny that we have a brain better fit for reasoning, innovation, technological advances and finding a way to create a society everyone benefits from go right ahead.

Sure animals and people both have scarcity of resources.......however humans are probably better able to find ways of distributing the resources more effectively. Thing is people are trying to argue instinctual animal nature is human nature, when that's simply not the case. Now i am starting to get that song by some band can't remember which one my cousin had me listen to about humans devolving....

Oh really? because I'm mentally ill and have no desire to murder anyone....besides if mental illness was the reason for the murder that individual should be not guilty by reason of insanity. Nope non mentally ill people can murder..........just look at the holocaust, lol not all of Germany was mentally ill I can guarantee that...certainly conditioned though.

But I'll humour you, what mental illness?

I still can't comprehend that you'd still say this after looking at the NT world for more than 20 years and claim that they aren't doing so because of a magic infalsifiable link to capitalism, additionally claiming that people could simply be better to each other if they would, but they won't, and the system is to blame for their apathy, malice, and whatever else.

Driving home from work I had something else hit me as well. If I ended up shagging a guy's girlfriend and he wanted to beat me senseless over it (regardless of whether he could succeed), is my misdemeanor and his retribution because of capitalism? If I go out to a bar with a really attractive girl tonight and a bunch of guys start trying to f' with me because I don't look strong enough to them to be with her, is that capitalism? If I get drunk at that bar, wreck my car in a DUI and kill a whole bunch of people - was it capitalism? When people want to blame capitalism for the majority of the worlds ills, for driving human behavior I keep noticing how factors like sex drive, reproductive scarcity, self-protection, pride, desire for respect, etc. get ignored or shoved off as isolated issues rather than prime directives; which IMO in a socialist/communist/TZM model has to be done because to believe that capitalism is modeled to account for traits that humans can't extinguish, which can't be extinguished because of inequity inherent in nature and existence itself, would mean that the whole a-priori basis of that argument is simply gone.

I can't agree with that sort of blanket term either. To be much more specific it comes from psychopathy and narcissism. Whether we can ever truly call 'mental illness' a nonsubjective territory, especially if it includes everything from schizophrenia to antisocial personality disorder is a completely different matter altogether.

And no I am not going to go blaming every senerio that takes place on capitalism...I am saying as a whole a lot of the negative ways people treat each other have a lot to do with the way society is set up and the sort of thing that is encouraged through media, social norms ect. why are you trying to put words in my mouth about this?......I've said what I said and I never suggested capitalism is to blame for every negative situation someone finds them self in.

I agree with you sweetleaf. The structure of society, in a broad sense, and the conditionning makes a lot in human behavior. Nevertheless, I believe there is a basic pre-programming of human beings, just like there is a physical genotype-phenotype, there is a mental genotype-phenotype. For example, the need to have shelter makes people build houses. There are things to take into account that limit the possibilities of what we can do with human beings. But for sure, the current organization of society is sick.

techstepgenr8tion, it's true that we call the current system capitalism and so the term is used as a global critique of the organization of society. In fact, it describes quite clearly what is going on, i.e. that private property has no limit and leads to negative behaviors. But a closer look at the word capitalism shows that, in fact, the problem is not property in itself, but the absence of limit. So if we limit property, we could have a better system. We may say that capitalism, in the way it is developped now, is a problem for us, but that capitalism as a way of accepting private property in economics, is ok.

Personally, I do not believe in anarchy because it states that there can be an absence of power between individuals whereas I think it is impossible. When we use money, we can count power, we can regulate it. If we have no money and no government, we just hide the power structure, but it's still there. Some people are more strong mentally, so we get a hierarchy even in anarchy. I think that the fact that it is hidden makes it somewhat worse than it can look like.

Let me rephrase that. Anyone who desires to murder another person has some sort of mental illness.
Murder is not a natural human desire. By mental illness I don't mean aspergers,depression or PTSD.
I mean sociopathy,narcissism and some times schizophrenia. This does not mean that all mentally ill people will murder.

Actually the Holocaust was started by sociopaths which would qualify as mental illness.
Most of Germany was not mentally ill but they were scared,manipulated and brainwashed by sociopaths.
Many of them didn't even know about the Holocaust just like many people know nothing about the genocide of the Palestinians.
Most American politicians probably have an unknown mental illness.

I will admit to using a poor choice of words and I assume that I may be considered mentally ill.
To murder some one out of pure hatred and pleasure would be considered a mental illness.
Self-defense,war,defending another person does not exactly fit the definition of cold blooded murder.

Sorry if I'm butting in here, but...

I think more people fantasise about killing than you'd like to think. The only reason a lot of us don't do it is because we know there are very severe consequences.



Hitler was an empath.

I guess we should do the difference between different kind of murders, and the law already take them into account. We do not need to change everything !

The problem of Hitler was not about being empathic, but about having two opposite sides : nice to some, cold to others. But in fact, he was antisemitic which was a common illness. It's hard to think about it nowadays, but in the beggining of the XXth century, hating jews was accepted as a normal behavior, just like the hatred between religions. It is mostly the hate between christianity and judaism. Now christian extremists support Israël, in order to provoke the apocalypse. What a kind gesture !

Where I'll step backward a bit - capitalism, being that it was built to allow for problems without the problems breaking the system, may amplify the problems a bit because it treats them as normal rather than as a sickness.

That said I don't think the anger with the outlook you have is so much with that outlook, its where it leads in terms of conclusions - ie. like suggesting that communism would and should work if it had ever been tried. If you want to criticize the way it was instituted in places like Russia or Leon Trotsky's gestapo-like comments about useful idiots; great. Many nations tried it in the 20th century, so far China, Cuba, Eritrea, and maybe a couple others are left; China of course doing well because of its penchant for hypocrisy (then again its hypocrisy toward corporate person hood did supposedly save 300 million people from starvation per Charles Krauthamer's sources).

Now, my take on capitalism in the future - it will modify and wear thinner. I think we will ultimately have a capitalism that fades into something pretty close to what people are calling a social libertarian variant of socialism, anarcho-communism, libertarian socialism, etc. as innovation gets so good that AI and advanced production techniques essentially takes our jobs. The mistake I see people making constantly though is this notion that capitalism is this deliberately malevolent, suppressive regime headed by sociopaths who want nothing more than to control and that the only way to bring about something like a technocracy and libertarian socialism is the overthrow of, IMHO, their version of the Illuminati, Rothschilds, Bridgebuilders, Mason's - ie. that notion seems to be the Celestine Prophecy of the left.
That notion, IMHO, could tank the whole peaceful and gradual transition TOWARD what everyone wants; as innovation changes, as old ways stop being practical, as the marketplace of ideas actually opens up. If its done in steps as society is ready - its done in a way that will hold, not in a way that will self destruct. I think Russia and Communism is exactly why revolution, trying to push something ahead of its time or ahead of its means, is dangerous; because its essentially a huge battle-royal not with greed, not with people, its a epic battle with reality. Fighting reality is like fighting a cement wall, it doesn't matter how much heart you have, you won't win. When people try to say that capitalism is the only thing stopping us from having that world, IMHO, its a big straw boogeyman and horribly disingenuous, especially as the elephant of Southern Europe and the US's debts has its snout resting on their shoulder.



And what we're still at disagreement is what set that society up. I think we'd both agree that it started in a condition of scarcity, I think we'd both agree that it will change, but I can't agree that our anti-discipline, anti-adulthood, and anti-responsibility culture came from capitalism. The loss of those things didn't make us softer or gentler, it just made us more vile and without discipline we've become a lot less human. Why would discipline make us more human? Because with discipline we hammer the animal down rather than have it all hang out. When a society starts centering itself around having it all hang out you really have people who are worn out, ragged, tired of trying to mask themselves as 'human' who just want to go back to the jungle. To ever go forward we can't have that and we can't have a 'What's in it for me?' culture. That culture doesn't come from capitalism as much as it comes from a society too afraid to tell people what they need to stand for or to even give a secular mission statement on why personal responsibility and civics matter.

Nope mental illness is not a requirement for murder...also there is no proof anyone involved in the holocaust was a sociopath, not to mention last I checked sociopath is not even in the DSM. Humans are certainly capable of horrible things in their natural state, I am simply arguing those are not examples of human nature but rather lack of human nature. Behaving in a more primitive manner more appropriate for animals that do not have such a well developed frontal lobe is not human nature.

Mental illness would be if someone has a mental disorder that impairs their functioning and causes them discomfort......murdering people does not necessarily indicate such a thing.

techstepgenr8tion, discipline is not disappearing at work, it even gets worse. The younger generations are always seen as depravated throughout history. How do you want students to listen when they feel they have no future ? Don't you think it is linked with the financial crisis which is linked to the financial capitalism ? And the fact that people want everything instantly is directly linked to marketing and the principle of customer-oriented policies in corporations, which is linked to shareholders. Conspiracy theories are caricatures, but they point out sometimes real questions about the power structure.

Now, I would like to point out that the opposition communism - capitalism is like electroconvulsive therapy that erases people's mind, thinking there is only two alternatives : property or not property. Communism and capitalism are vague terms. In the strict sense, communism is not a political project, it is a theoretical goal, which I guess cannot exist, because it is contrary to human nature. Capitalism is also vague, does it mean liberalism ? For most people, this opposition... makes them forget about the question. Do you want communism or capitalism ? The result is zero or rigid attitudes to keep from falling into the zero.

I don't see it. We're in a world where hours, dress, employers, etc. are more friendly and flexible than they ever have been.


Actually, I'd debate that generation Y (1985 forward) is likely less depraved than generation X, who's still not nearly as depraved as the baby boomers. That last generation was where it all got set in motion and where subsequent generations have gotten better as they've been learning from their epic mistakes.


They should do their research into what's going on, what's happening to the money supply, and I get the impression that we'll have tons of new politicians bringing great ideas to the table from that generation. People who'd absolutely get up there and not only say that the banks have gotten too big or that education has become so overpriced and contentually worthless that its the next bubble that needs to be lanced, but actually mean so and follow through.


The bubbles come from both inflation of fiat currency and government playing social policy through tampering with laws. If the government wants to give handouts they need to give handouts (like in the case of the redlining problems that forced banks to agree to bad loans, which threw all standards out the window for everyone, after which Fannie and Freddie were put to the task - by a corrupt congress, of taking these loans).



Its there but at the same time who let the punks set the tempo? As I can remember teachers can't do anything about bullies; it may be getting resolved now albeit in a rather strange and probably worse manner of solution - calling the police to drag the bully or misbehaving kid out.


Except that there's barely anything I can find here to agree with.


No, Koolaid does that. Whether you're Koolaid is Smith or Marx though probably tends more toward where you were raised or who your parents were.



Right. No music, no art, no special interests, no menagerie of careers to choose from, life goals, thoughts of what you want to do with your friends tonight, what you want to watch on tv, etc. Properly Stepfordized.



Which is why its so wrong that people need to take a constant beating on the people dedicated to holding their world up and keeping it functioning, all for the sake of their luxurious illusions about reality.


Its an economic concept. Whether a person is a social liberal or conservative is somewhat irrespective. I tend social liberal albeit I get that there's a line between arbitrary and unneeded pain and hassle vs. obligations we have, ie. rights have a reciprocal half - responsibilities.


So the clash of the ideas of capitalism and communism or what they mean draws people to a place of unthinking numbness.


Rigid attitudes to keep people from falling into the rigid? I need help with this one.

I don't believe sociopaths or narcissists are protected under the law and I hope they never are The problem with psychopaths (actually more accurate here than sociopaths who are created by society) is while they have a fundamental difference in the way they are wired, they are wired to destroy people. Narcissists have guilt so I have sympathy but I have no sympathy for psychopaths (again like sociopaths but just born with it), only hate and pity because that is what they deserve and it has no effect on them anyways so what the hell is the difference?. True sociopaths/psychopaths have no guilt, no conscience, and so they deserve everything that comes to them. If we let them off the hook for being "wired differently" we are committing an even worse evil by not protecting the innocent.

mild humour aside, surely if this notion of human nature is indeed what it is claimed to be, it would preside at an instinctual level in every human, no? as mentioned, i seem to conspicuously lack it, as do many others. i think it imprudent simply to ascribe this to "being autistic".

decisions must be robustly discussed and debated. things wouldn't be as simple as a vote cast. the predilection for specialist experts who preside over elite authoritative roles is the root of the problem.



how do you mean, people make their own decisions in government? do you mean people en masse, or simply those who are members of governing bodies? the preponderance of lobbyists, nepotism, and even things as openly acknowledged as toeing the party line etc. suggest otherwise.

again, no opinion should simply be followed, all decisions should be based upon robust and rigourous discussion which be necessity has to involve the entire community.



no problem at all.