Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Guns and anarchist society

Discussion in 'Anarchism and radical activism' started by ungovernable, May 16, 2010.

  1. bgrass

    bgrass Experienced Member Experienced member


    50

    0

    0

    Apr 11, 2010
     
    You act like god makes us as adults and says "which community do you want to live in?". I'm born where I live and it is another group of people imposing their will on me. If I don't sign their damn contract, will they force me out of my home, or will they just shun me. I'm fine with the latter, not with the first. Why do I have to move, why do I have to leave? Why does a larger group then another get to wield this authority over the smaller group or individual? Why is a certain percentage make controlling people or forcing them from their homes ok?

    I don't know what your talking about with pacifism, I've never claimed to be a pacifist. But by what authority does a "community" have any business deciding what rules I can set for myself? They don't own me, I own me, so I will govern my own life. As long as I'm not harming anyone else, they have no authority to lay a hand on me.
     
  2. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    So in your supposedly "anarchist" society i will be allowed to own a nuclear bomb, chemical weapons, agent orange, anthrax, and all the other stuff i listed until it becomes an immediate threat against you or others ? Awesome !

    You didn't answer the question about capitalism, money and GMO.

    Then you are not an anarchist.

    So you are an hypocrite since you are "claiming the ownership over individuals" like you said (to use your own words)

    You are doing the exact same thing than you critize us of doing.

    And what would you do if someone sold guns to children ? Nothing except saying you disagree ? What you would do if children brought war weapons to the school your own kid goes to ? You would not want to disarm them ? You would not want some kind of social contract against weapons at school ?

    No you are lying and being hypocrite. You just admitted kids aren't free to have a gun.

    That's exactly the same thing we want to do in an anarchist community. If the majority agree, guns wouldn't be allowed inside the demilitarized community but we wouldn't control what happens outside of the community.

    BTW a school is a public place just like a community is.


    Seriously i can't believe how hard you want to have your guns and you can't accept any consensus against weapons. You must seriously have been brainwashed by USA politics and your dumb constitution by thinking owning guns equal freedom. I seriously don't see any reason why an anarchist would want guns as bad as you after a revolution. You should join the US Army or something if you are so much of a weapons fanatic...


    And again the NRA-like speech. Guns don't kill peoples, peoples kill peoples. Guns are peace, demilitarization is violence, blah blah blah. War is peace and freedom is slavery!

    Following your stupid theory, the whole concept of anarchism is violence and assumption of ownership over persons since we are against capitalist, against bourgeoisie, against private proprety, against bosses, etc.... We will already use violence to "get what we want" So i guess we are claiming ownership over everybody, woohoo!!

    Ok seriously. You are definatly not an anarchist.


    No shit ! That's exactly what we want to do. If at least you'd make an effort to understand what i mean with "voluntary social contract"
    ..............
     
  3. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    If you want to start a capitalist economy, you are free to but not inside anarchist communities that chosen to live without capitalism.
    If you want a fascism state, you are asked to build your state at another place than inside a community that chosen to live without state and without fascism.
    And we don't care if the capitalist or the fascist was born into the community or live here. Either he accept the collective social contract or either he leave.

    Same thing with guns. It's funny how you can understand the first 2 points but not the third. I call that hypocrisy...

    Anarchism is all about THE COLLECTIVITY BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL. You have to think about others before thinking of yourself. But you don't understand this concept because you know nothing about anarchism, in fact you are a liberal and an individualist opposed to the collectivism.





    On another note, both of you still failed to explain why we would absolutly need guns. First the argument was to protect yourself (dumb argument by the guns defenders brainwashed by the politics of insecurity propaganda by the governments that keeps making us believe we always live in insecurity, that's to justify their security laws). Then the argument was that we need to defend ourselves against the ones who defend ourselves. But i think i have successfully proven that an anarchist self-defense organized through horizontal syndicates wouldn't be a threat to anyone. So in conclusion, there is no argument to justify the need of weapons everywhere in an anarchist community. In fact it would be more dangerous to let weapons everywhere, especially if the authority that used to prevent peoples from comitting murders disseapeared (the state, the laws and the prisons). It would also be a big risk : couter-revolutionnaries could organize, build militias and take back the power with the weapons that YOU allowed them to own.
     
  4. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Now you believe in God? The community will have a say because you will have chosen to live there, and now you are equating the capitalist society you currently live under to an anarchist society, I'm sorry bgrass but you seem very confused to me, are you here to learn about anarchism or are you here to argue things which you clearly don't comprehend? What is it exactly you believe in? Because if you want to turn your life into another Ted Kazsinsky you're absolutely free to do that, but that isn't anarchism; maybe you should study what Anarcho-Syndicalism is a little more before coming on an anarchist forum to argue endlessly. Please understand I'm not trying to sound condescending at all, it just seems to me your having serious trouble understanding the concept. :ecouteurs:
     
  5. Vegetarian Barbarian

    Vegetarian Barbarian Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    719

    2

    0

    Oct 19, 2009
     
    Unless you didnt understand what i said, i didnt i was talking about the end of civilization itself, The only way that civilization would end is with the collapse of society followed by killing of millions not from a long period of starvation but with mass killings, destruction, war (mostly), nuclear bombs, etc. etc. etc. starvation is apart of it and comes way after the fact which i wasnt referring to whatsoever, but is not the cause of it nor the reason for the collapse and end of civilization.
     
  6. Wooly

    Wooly Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    123

    0

    0

    May 24, 2010
     
    That is what im trying to explain. In a society that could easily become lawless over a long period of time, It is reasonable to anticipate that Non-Violent people would have to defend themselves against violent "non-anarchists". ANYWAY, this is extremely off topic.
    Fair call
    Im not ignoring you, im just not familiar with your historical examples. Im trying to get my head around a lot of shit, maybe my mind isn't
    open enough yet.
    Human history is wrought with corruption. If there were a very large amount of people unified under one cause with no ultimate leader (like how you have explained the CNT), Corruption would easily be able to be neutralized by other syndicate members. As im beginning to understand the syndicates, im starting to realize that its a actually a good idea. I was skeptical to begin with because i did not understand what you were talking about. :thumbsup:
     
  7. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States

    Unholy shit!! We have a winner, give that man a big thumbs up!! :thumbsup:
     
  8. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    8

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male , 46 years old
    Long Beach CA  United States
    it's been explained to you that what we want is to have societies where you can choose to be a part of or not, as long as you follow the rules of the said community. i don's see how it is unreasonable for the community to expect you to follow their rules or you leave and go somewhere else. it's not like you wouldn't know the rules before hand. if you don't understand or deny this guidelines, you are either totally ignorant, egotistical, or just plain thick (or even a combination of those).

    I love the ridiculous misconception that anarchism means no rules.
     
  9. Wooly

    Wooly Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    123

    0

    0

    May 24, 2010
     
    ?????????
     
  10. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    I meant you get it and aren't going to argue for another 5 pages like other's on here.
     
  11. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Well at least someone understand the concept! Glad to see you get it, and sorry for being a bit impatient, but so many persons refuse to question themselves and learn... but it looks like you are not one of them !

    So yeah, like anxiety said, basically anarchists just want to live the way they want while letting others also live the way they want. But i would add that this freedom of living the way you want shouldn't affect others, for example we couldn't tolerate that others community play with nuclear central or even worse, nuclear weapons... Since after all, we all live on the same planet and a nuclear disaster affects everyone... Same thing for pollution and all.... "live and let others live" but also mutual respect...
     
  12. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    I know you speak French but shouldn't you use the Spanish?
    Or are you referring to the French CNT? Thought you were referring to Spanish revo
    Anywayz, in Spain:
    CNT= Confederacion Nacional del Trabajo
    or for us english speaking plebes- National Confederation of Labour

    For those not as nerdy as me, the CNT in Spain around the Spanish revo times were affiliated with the FAI (Federacion Anarquista Iberica/ Iberian Anarchist Federation). Or, I believe more accurately, the FAI were a group within the CNT whom maintained an organisational separation in order to carry out different tasks should the CNT disagree with the FAI.

    On the question of syndicates (or militias, the two are largely interchangeable within Anarchist discourse i feel), it was the opinion of the CNT-FAI in 1936 that arming the workers, and organising them into militias through the workplace, was highly advantageous, and more reflective of anarcho-syndicalist praxis, than the militarisation of the anti-fascist side in this conflict. I share this view.

    Workplace or community militias differ from militarisation insofar as decision-making within said militias would occur through the direct democratic practises and non-coercive social relationships largely pre-existing from, say, the unionised workers. It was this structure that spawned the term "affinity group", the trust and knowledge of one another creates far greater organisation strength and disperses decision making power. Militarisation requires centralisation in order to function. Thus, militias or syndicates are more democratic in structure.

    Further, arming the workers disperses power completely. The potential tyranny of a centrally controlled military is severely undermined by an armed (and organised of course!) oppressed class/es engaged in fighting this oppression.

    It is worth noting that this is my opinion of the preferable organisational structure in an all out class war. It in no way reflects my opinions on anarchists, or anyone, arming themselves for any other reason.

    I don't own a gun, don't desire a gun, and am pretty fucking happy that there are shit loads more restrictions put on their sale here in Australia then in, say, the US. The whole 'right to bear arms' thing is fucking strange to me, and many other Aussies i know. Another example of 'those crazy yanks'. We had one psycho go nuts and shoot multiple people here bout a decade ago now (Port Arthur massacre for those interested), it resulted in the banning of automatic pistols and semi-automatic rifles. I don't see this as a bad thing. The US seems to have these sorta incidents all the fucking time, and nothing changes, I find this fucking unbelievable. Maybe its just a cultural thing.

    It sure ain't, LOL

    re Spanish Revo check:

    Orwell, G., Homage to Catalonia. (probs in yr local library)
    Paz, A., Durruti in the Spanish Revolution (probs not, lol)
    Friends of Durruti, Towards a Fresh Revolution, zinelibrary.info/towards-fresh-revolution
    Bookchin, M., To Remember Spain
    Willis, L., Women in the Spanish Revolution http://zinelibrary.info/women-spanish-revolution
    Various, Sisters in Arms: Women in the Spanish Revolution zinelibrary.info/sisters-arms-women-spanish-revolution
    Rocker, R., The tragedy of Spain zinelibrary.info/tradegy-spain
    a collection of articles on the FAI at Libcom libcom.org/tags/fai


    Zapatismo
    can't remember author, Wobblies & Zapatistas
    Vodovnik, Z. (ed.), !Ya Basta!
    El Kilombo Collective, Beyond Resistance Everything: An interview with Subcomandante Marcos

    Russia/Kronstadt
    http://libcom.org/tags/kronstadt
    Avrich, P., The Russian Anarchists zinelibrary.info/russian-anarchists

    Makhnovists
    libcom.org/history/articles/ukrainian-uprising-1917-21
    libcom.org/library/who-are-makhnovists-makhno


    Warsaw Ghetto Uprising (not Anarchist, but still fucking rad)

    Edelman, M., The Ghetto Fights: Warsaw 1941-43, Bookmarks, Melbourne, 1990 (good fucking luck finding it! unless you speak Polish or Yiddish ain't that common, Makor Library in Caulfield and the Holocaust Museum have copies in English)

    General good shit

    Lucy Parsons zinelibrary.info/writings-lucy-parsons
    Bone, I., Bash the Rich (his autobiography i think)
    Some interesting stuff here fantinreadinggroup.wordpress.com/
    Chummy Flemming, Melbourne Represent! www.takver.com/history/chummy.htm
    J.A. Andrews, one of the founders of the Melbourne Anarchist Club, still going strong-ish, What is Communism? fantinreadinggroup.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/j-a-andrews/
    Debord, G., Society of the Spectacle, cos everyone has to pretend to have read and understood Situationism library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/pub_contents/4
    The Invisible Committee, The Coming Insurrection, cos Glenn Beck said so!! zinelibrary.info/coming-insurrection
     
  13. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    I don't speak spanish so i use the french name. The french CNT is the same thing than spanish CNT. French CNT was born during the spanish revolution and is working exactly the same way but yes i was referring to the spanish revolution

    yes exactly, and the CNT itself was multiples small groups who were federated together. There were a couple of different groups too, CNT-FAI being one but there is also the CNT-AIT and others

    Thanks for having the patience to explain in english how the CNT and the self-defende brigades works, you explained it way better than me !

    Like i said, the USA is a very special case, the whole world think differently. I started this same debate on a french anarchist forum and not a single anarchist said that gun control is breaking the freedom of others. In fact, i believe most of the anarchist agree unanimously on this case, except the americans. That's why i believe it is because they are being falsely told that owning guns equal freedom and they grew up with all this propaganda, were being told that the constitution is the biggest expression of freedom and that the second amendement is very important, etc.... Also the USA politics always focused on security politics (pretty much what what France is trying to do since sarkozy came to power) so they keep saying over and over again that we live in an insecure world and we need laws to protect ourselves, and guns...



    Very good litterature recommendations !! There's also a couple of documentaries in the "documentaries" forum of a-p.net worth checking out
     
  14. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Shit, completely forgot bout the CNT-AIT, oops, lol, together we get close to the truth.

    I hope 'Land and Freedom' (Tierra Y Libertad) is in the doco section, essential viewing
     
  15. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Oops, not land and freedom!
    "Living Utopia" is the one i meant, essential viewing! and yes on this site!
    land and freedom is reactionary (although I've not seen it)! lol
     
  16. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    yes it's here, definatly an essential viewing ;)

    Why do you say Land and freedom is reactionary ? I really liked this movie (watched it only a couple of months ago since i was never able to find it before)... Watch it, it is a great movie. Maybe not perfect but it's really better than what i was expecting !
    "Libertarias" is also great but only available in subtitled version... It's about anarcho-feminism and the role of women in the spanish revolution
     
  17. bgrass

    bgrass Experienced Member Experienced member


    50

    0

    0

    Apr 11, 2010
     
    I'm not talking about someone who signed some contract when they moved to a community, but when the contracted is imposed upon them by others. What happens when the social contract is drawn up by whoever, most of the people in that area sign onto it, but some refuse, what happens to them? Also, what if the social contract did not have anything regarding weapons, but after the fact a large percentage of the population decides they want to prohibit guns, what happens to those that refuse to obey?

    From what I gather, force will be applied to remove them from their homes and from the community if they consistently refuse to obey what other people have decided for their lives. Am I right? And if so, how is that aggressive use of violence justified? Is it the number of people that decide its ok or is it who those people in community happen to be? Is it popular opinion that changes an immoral us of violence into a moral use of violence?
     
  18. bgrass

    bgrass Experienced Member Experienced member


    50

    0

    0

    Apr 11, 2010
     
    Is this what you all believe? This is very dangerous thinking. This is what has justified so much murder, evil, rape, theft, slavery and hate. It is where the state stems from from. It is how government gets its false legitimacy.

    It is the individual that feels, it is the individual that has free will, it is the individual that experiences life, it is the individual that is real. The collective is just an idea and its just a group of individuals. So to put the collective above an individual, is only some individuals hurting another individual, for the betterment of an idea. Just like murder for the advancement of the white race. just like murder for national pride. Just like murder to protect a corporations profit margin. Just like murder to keep the appearance of the community up. Just like its murder to keep a gun free community.

    There are only individuals hurting other individuals, and an idea of a collective is no justification to hurt someone else.
     
  19. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Why are you here? Now your turning into a troll, are you dense? Who said anything about signing contracts? You equate anarchism with white power, with capitalism, yup you're a troll. Study something then get back to us, dunce.
     
  20. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    8

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male , 46 years old
    Long Beach CA  United States
    i'm sure there would be a vote on the issues at hand, and before joining the community in the first place you would have to agree to the voting process, which should be laid down and made clear beforehand. then if a new rule is passed, and you refuse to oblige, you should leave. Why would you want to live in a community that doesn't agree with your points of view on something that is obviously so meaningful to you? I haven't heard anyone here say anything about violent force to remove anyone, but if it is necessary in a case where someone commits a violent act or threatens one, then so be it. All this nitpicking is really irrelevant right now since we don't live in a community like that, nor does it look like we will be setting one up anytime soon. let's fight our real enemies first.

    i don't even understand your collectives are murder argument. The whole point of a collective is for everyone to give their voice before actions are taken. No system is perfect, and flaws may occur, but it sounds a whole lot better to me then living under the falshehood of democracy that is currently in place here in the USA.

    It seems you you didn't read the who we are charter before coming here, or you just like to argue.
     
Loading...