Hard News: Te Qaeda and the God Squad
938 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 21 22 23 24 25 … 38 Newer→ Last
-
Given some of the horrendous press the police have had lately, they will be taking very careful measures not to be home to Mr and Mrs Cock-up. The evidence does seem to be compelling, and much of the hysteria is largely due to the media being very imprecise in how they report routine police proceedure, not helped by activist and media drama queens deliberately inflating relatively innocuous police responses to what they percieved - for whatever reasons - as a serious threat.
-
David, establishing a society for a few months or years hardly moves beyond "interesting social experiment." For one thing, if your model society collapses under the weight of external pressure, I have to wonder how model it really is.
-
Andrew, you've got be joking. The police have had horrendous press recently and have an appalling public image, so it's in their interests to play this up and scare the middle classes into taking them seriously again. Relatively innocuous indeed!
There have been these special new counter-terrorism squads sitting round with nothing to do but play toy soldiers in exercises for the last five or six years. What do you think the scenarios of those exercises would have been? I'd be very surprised if they weren't about a grand coalition of maori radicals, environmentalists, and anarchists with secret bases in the bush plotting to take over the country.
-
The evidence does seem to be compelling
A very controversial assertion.
hysteria
Sez you.
they percieved - for whatever reasons - as a serious threat.
Well, the accuracy of that perception is the critical point, isn't it?
-
In both cases, your 'interesting social experiment' was set up and implemented in poor (especially by contemporary Western standards) countries that were in the middle of a war. That they managed to do so, let alone maintain it in the face of determined opposition, suggests to me that knee-jerk reactions like 'it can't be done cos people are too selfish' are simply wrong. The Whites and the Reds joining forces (!!!) to defeat the Blacks in the Ukraine should tell you what a serious threat both of them found it.
-
relatively innocuous police responses
Have to agree to disagree there unless some seriously damning information is released in a reasonable timeframe as to why all 17 of them should be legitimately in custody.
For someone who's into democratic government you don't seem too into the values that maintain it.
Yep.
Time will tell. That is about as much faith as I have in the process.
-
All we are saying is that there is a viable alternative to authoritarianism. You don't need priests, kings, nations, governments, laws, police, prisons, or soldiers. It can be and has been done.
-
Nestor Makhno successfully established an anarchist society during the Russian Revolution.
From your Makhno link:
Skeptics on the Bolshevik side argue that the above description of Makhnovist Ukraine is a myth. They find it unrealistic that a war-ravaged, economically isolated, agricultural region like Ukraine (though eastern Ukraine included the largest coal and iron mines, in the former Russian Empire, and was relatively industrialized)[1] could be turned into an anarchist paradise in a few days or even months, simply by using correct anarchist ideology.
Trotsky, in a series of articles, charged that the "anarchist republic" was a military dictatorship with few or sham elections, and all the important ministers chosen by Makhno and his lieutenants, who frequently exercised the power to conduct summary executions. The most infamous example is the charge that Makhno, during the course of a simple conversation in his tent, decided that one of his officers was a reactionary and shot him outright. There is no evidence that this shooting occurred, but neither is there that popular democracy ever existed in Makhnovist Ukraine.
There were many claims of extreme atrocities committed by Makhno's Army. Makhno reserved a particular hatred of monarchists and aristocrats, and they were exterminated mercilessly whenever they fell into Makhnovists' hands, as were White Army officers. After the souring and dissolution of Makhno's coalition with Bolsheviks the captured Red commanders and comissars were similarly summarily executed. However, Makhno usually preferred to release the disarmed enlisted men that were captured, as "proletarian brothers", with a choice of joining his army or returning home, after all commanding officers were executed. This happened to an Estonian Red Army brigade that surrendered to Makhno in 1919, and several other German, Nationalist and Red Army units.
This clemency which Makhno applied to all enlisted men except the Whites, was not based on any Romantic notion, but formed a part of Makhno's strategy. It proved to be extremely useful, and greatly increased his army's manpower, as many chose to join the anarchists.
Neither of the two local primers I linked to venture on what you'd do should even a few citizens think differently and, say, insisted on comporting themselves as capitalists. It's implicitly assumed that everyone will agree.
I find the tendency to dehumanise anyone in authority quite distasteful too.
The irony is that the protocols for the internet, which has done so much to really subvert hierarchies and facilitate cooperative effort, were created by military researchers who struck a neat balance between community engagement and freedom and, where necessary, making authoritative decisions -- which were enforced in part by their control over state funding.
-
As fun as it may or may not be to debate the merits of Anarchism I think it is a dry exercise. We need to pay more than just lip service to peoples right to challenge or even (shock horror!) transform the society we live in. Not that I am advocating violence, just suggesting we sneer at radical passionately involved people at our peril.
-
In both cases, your 'interesting social experiment' was set up and implemented in poor (especially by contemporary Western standards) countries that were in the middle of a war.
Unfortunately, there are no examples amongst peaceable market democracies to study.
-
Neither of the two local primers I linked to venture on what you'd do should even a few citizens think differently and, say, insisted on comporting themselves as capitalists. It's implicitly assumed that everyone will agree.
The point is that you're free to comport yourself any way you please. There's a company in South America that uses anarchist management structures (there's a term, but I'm afraid I can't remember it). Workers set their own hours, salaries, and conditions and can take part in, and vote at, board meetings. It works really well, apparently - you just have to make allowance for the small minority who can't handle it and need to be told what to do.
I would imagine an anarchist society would contain pockets of such people.
I find the tendency to dehumanise anyone in authority quite distasteful too.
So do I, which is why I'm against people holding authority. Just look what it does to them.
-
I would imagine an anarchist society would contain pockets of such people.
Would it also contain pockets of, say, armed robbers or simple thieves?
__I find the tendency to dehumanise anyone in authority quite distasteful too.__
So do I, which is why I'm against people holding authority. Just look what it does to them.
It certainly seemed to bring out the worst in yer man Makhno ...
-
We need to pay more than just lip service to peoples right to challenge or even (shock horror!) transform the society we live in. Not that I am advocating violence, just suggesting we sneer at radical passionately involved people at our peril.
There is no incompatability between supporting someone's right to attempt to transform society and laughing (or sneering) at their excesses.
Would it also contain pockets of, say, armed robbers or simple thieves?
Ha ha, if everything belonged to everybody, there'd be nothing to steal.
-
David, establishing a society for a few months or years hardly moves beyond "interesting social experiment." For one thing, if your model society collapses under the weight of external pressure, I have to wonder how model it really is.
I would argue that the society that we live in is a mixture of capitalism and socialism, with some other isms thrown in. The balance moves around a little, and varies country to country, but pretty much everyone has a mixed society in this way.
Yet if I was to say that capitalism didn't work on the basis that there's no pure capitalist countries I'd probably be laughed at. Yet people happily say the exactly same thing about socialism, anarchism etc etc.
Personally I don't think any of them work well in pure forms, which is why we're in the melting pot of ideas at the moment. Capitalism moderated by socialism. Authority moderated by anarchism. And vice versa. -
Wait wait!
Why do anarchists drink herbal tea?Because proper tea is theft.
Sorry, back to what you were doing. -
Right, I'm leaving "the thread that would not die" before someone starts quoting Nietzche aphorisms. Auf Wiedersehn - it's been lovely as always.
-
Anarchy has been tried and is still being tried all over the world. It's not theoretical, it's a perfectly valid emigration option. Anyone who truly loves lawless society doesn't have to go very far at all to find one. For humanity it has been the norm for most of our existence, governments are a very modern invention.
The Maori have even lived that way in comparatively recent times, when NZ was first settled by them, the early period would have been beautifully anarchic. So long as resources were superabundant, populations low, and no existing power structures got in the way, people would have lived in comparative peace and bounty.
Why did it end? Why was Maori society not anarchic when Europeans arrived? OK, it wouldn't exactly have been a safe and lawful place, definitely was not by all early European accounts, but there were power structures in place.
Riddle me that, anarchist.
-
Oh bugger - I can't resist.
Actually, pre-Maori Polynesian settlers would have been very strictly bound up in familial hierarchies, taboos etc - hence Maori society's tribal/aristocratic structure. -
There is no incompatability between supporting someone's right to attempt to transform society and laughing (or sneering) at their excesses.
Yes that is true. For me at the moment it is a matter of emphasis, I am focused on the lack of real information. That just bothers me more right now than these kinds of discussions. (Athough I enjoy them on some level or I wouldn't be here obviously)
-
Yoza,
It seems strange that Anarchism is being derided when western 'capitalist' social democracies have so much blood on their hands. Anarchists cannot be blamed for the invasion/carnage in Iraq or the unsustainable neo-liberal mercantilist corporate experiment which, according to the latest U.N. environment report, is actually threatening the existence of humanity.
Would it also contain pockets of, say, armed robbers or simple thieves?
That's another one of the things I love about contemporary society, there are no more thieves, armed robbers or murderers anymore and the political elite work harmoniously with their corporate counterparts for the benefit of humanity *vomits*.
-
Right, I'm leaving "the thread that would not die" before someone starts quoting Nietzche aphorisms. Auf Wiedersehn - it's been lovely as always.
If that happens I am outtie
-
Though it may surprise you, I actually agree with you kowhai - but sneering is __sooooomuch fun.
-
Yet if I was to say that capitalism didn't work on the basis that there's no pure capitalist countries I'd probably be laughed at. Yet people happily say the exactly same thing about socialism, anarchism etc etc.
Personally I don't think any of them work well in pure forms, which is why we're in the melting pot of ideas at the moment. Capitalism moderated by socialism. Authority moderated by anarchism. And vice versa.
And yet both the things I linked to seemed to take an absolutist stance: no capitalism, no state, period.
I did find this list of principles easier to swallow. As I noted, I have a good deal of time for community co-operation, the flattening of hierarchies, etc. I also reckon commerce is a bloody good idea.
-
If that happens I am outtie
Weird. I thought you wrote "I am an outtie", and I thought "Why is she talking about her belly button?"
-
Interesting site that Russell - it's spookily not entirely dissimilar to the US Declaration of Independance
I apologise to all if I occasionally sound a bit cranky, it is the Socratic way to provoke to extremes, and I am a huffy jaded new fogey cynic.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.