## An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism.

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

### An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism.

I remember how the longest time I was an anarchist and how I believed that I would never change my mind for as long as I lived unwavering in my anarchist ideals that I embraced for almost nine years. [Almost a decade.]

What changed my views in not being an anarchist anymore? It's true that a majority of human beings are cattle where they're herded around by a small minority of other human beings that are human ranchers. Civilization is a farm of human livestock ruled by finance capital where human beings domesticate and farm other human beings. Now you may think to yourself with all of that anarchism is the only answer (solution) justified and that we need anarchy now but there's just one problem with all of that which I've discovered over the years. You see anarchy if there was ever such a thing before the madness of civilization and rigid highly controlled social hierarchy will only work for a small number of rebellious individuals as a majority of human beings are dumb brainwashed herd animals unable to survive, exist, or thrive on their own. They might complain here and there about the oppressive nature of governments but in all reality a majority of human beings if offered the opportunity to exist in a world and environment without government wouldn't know how to survive or what to even do with their time living directionless. Also, given the choice between revolution, individual autonomy, or counter culture versus materialistic greed and money understand that a majority of human beings will choose greed every time. So, if you're a die hard anarchist contemplate all of this in embracing that particular mindset is a lonely one full of despair or constant angst where if you're waiting for an anarchist revolution globally not only will you be waiting for a longtime for a revolution that will never materialize you will be sorely disappointed to which your faith in humanity will be lost.

Human beings (majority) are psychologically weak, manipulative, and lazy where in the long run this is what caused me to lose all faith in anarchism. For a large majority human beings are incapable of anarchism. A majority of human beings know nothing beyond the master and slave relationship where most of the slaves cannot be liberated as they'll choose their own slavery every time.
"I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2876 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. True enough ... though every once in a while something "outside the box" happens. For example: Winter Olympics medal count 2018: Norway running away with overall lead ... and Norway has a population of 5.2 million people!! Source: https://www.sbnation.com/2018/2/18/1702 ... ermany-usa "Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said” Thomas Kempis 1380-1471 pilgrim-seeker_tom Philosopher Posts: 1858 Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:True enough ... though every once in a while something "outside the box" happens. For example: Winter Olympics medal count 2018: Norway running away with overall lead ... and Norway has a population of 5.2 million people!! Source: https://www.sbnation.com/2018/2/18/1702 ... ermany-usa Off-topic! The current Olympics has nothing to do with the conversation! "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2876 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. Civilization is a farm of human livestock ruled by finance capital where human beings domesticate and farm other human beings. ... and you can't see the "Olympics" ... especially the 2018 Olympics ... in your above statement. suppose there's lots of stuff invisible to the blind. "Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said” Thomas Kempis 1380-1471 pilgrim-seeker_tom Philosopher Posts: 1858 Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote: Civilization is a farm of human livestock ruled by finance capital where human beings domesticate and farm other human beings. ... and you can't see the "Olympics" ... especially the 2018 Olympics ... in your above statement. suppose there's lots of stuff invisible to the blind. If you can't stay on topic simply leave so others can take your place. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2876 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. Generally readers simply ignore my posts ... on topic and/or off topic. I'm flattered that you feel compelled to comment. Thanks Hit a Nerve.jpg (50.72 KiB) Viewed 3525 times "Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said” Thomas Kempis 1380-1471 pilgrim-seeker_tom Philosopher Posts: 1858 Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:Generally readers simply ignore my posts ... on topic and/or off topic. I'm flattered that you feel compelled to comment. Thanks Hit a Nerve.jpg Don't let the door hit you on the way out either. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$

Zero_Sum
Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire.

Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America.

### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism.

Zero_Sum wrote:I remember how the longest time I was an anarchist and how I believed that I would never change my mind for as long as I lived unwavering in my anarchist ideals that I embraced for almost nine years. [Almost a decade.]

What changed my views in not being an anarchist anymore? It's true that a majority of human beings are cattle where they're herded around by a small minority of other human beings that are human ranchers. Civilization is a farm of human livestock ruled by finance capital where human beings domesticate and farm other human beings. Now you may think to yourself with all of that anarchism is the only answer (solution) justified and that we need anarchy now but there's just one problem with all of that which I've discovered over the years. You see anarchy if there was ever such a thing before the madness of civilization and rigid highly controlled social hierarchy will only work for a small number of rebellious individuals as a majority of human beings are dumb brainwashed herd animals unable to survive, exist, or thrive on their own. They might complain here and there about the oppressive nature of governments but in all reality a majority of human beings if offered the opportunity to exist in a world and environment without government wouldn't know how to survive or what to even do with their time living directionless. Also, given the choice between revolution, individual autonomy, or counter culture versus materialistic greed and money understand that a majority of human beings will choose greed every time. So, if you're a die hard anarchist contemplate all of this in embracing that particular mindset is a lonely one full of despair or constant angst where if you're waiting for an anarchist revolution globally not only will you be waiting for a longtime for a revolution that will never materialize you will be sorely disappointed to which your faith in humanity will be lost.

Human beings (majority) are psychologically weak, manipulative, and lazy where in the long run this is what caused me to lose all faith in anarchism. For a large majority human beings are incapable of anarchism. A majority of human beings know nothing beyond the master and slave relationship where most of the slaves cannot be liberated as they'll choose their own slavery every time.
A couple of issues: 1) couldn't the structre of society be part of the cattleness of the members? IOW if you are changing things, perhaps you would change things like education, where being hard working cattle is rewarded and being more lazy cattle is tolerated, but anything more creative or dynamic gets punished. 2) your solution is now to have a benevolent dictatorship and one that fosters a strong order - as yet not described, but that's fine. I suppose the idea would be that the elite or you alone would be able to be free and have the positive side of anarchism in their/your own life, while the masses live under rigid but kind rule. I am skeptical that it works out neatly like this. While the elites have tended to be anarchistic in the decadent sense their personalities seem rather rigid and boring. I think this in part due to their essense, but further I think that once you set yourself up as the controller/jailer/dictator your own freedom gets damaged, though in a more pampered and safe way then those you control. The dog walker is on one end of the leash.

My own response to point 1 would be that there would be some effects but there is something essential going on, but I am still interested in your response since essentialism is not easy to defend. In response to point 2, I think this is the case and was not just playing devil's advocate. It's not that I have a system suggestion. I just think at best yours is no better. Though since I don't know yet exactly what you mean, perhaps that will change. If you have explained how your dictatorship would work in a post, please link me.

It seems to me at best any new dictatorship will simple evolve/devolve (depending on one's perspective, into the oligarchy pretense democracies we have now. That is what they have done before, what about yours will prevent this?
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher

Posts: 2624
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:I remember how the longest time I was an anarchist and how I believed that I would never change my mind for as long as I lived unwavering in my anarchist ideals that I embraced for almost nine years. [Almost a decade.]

What changed my views in not being an anarchist anymore? It's true that a majority of human beings are cattle where they're herded around by a small minority of other human beings that are human ranchers. Civilization is a farm of human livestock ruled by finance capital where human beings domesticate and farm other human beings. Now you may think to yourself with all of that anarchism is the only answer (solution) justified and that we need anarchy now but there's just one problem with all of that which I've discovered over the years. You see anarchy if there was ever such a thing before the madness of civilization and rigid highly controlled social hierarchy will only work for a small number of rebellious individuals as a majority of human beings are dumb brainwashed herd animals unable to survive, exist, or thrive on their own. They might complain here and there about the oppressive nature of governments but in all reality a majority of human beings if offered the opportunity to exist in a world and environment without government wouldn't know how to survive or what to even do with their time living directionless. Also, given the choice between revolution, individual autonomy, or counter culture versus materialistic greed and money understand that a majority of human beings will choose greed every time. So, if you're a die hard anarchist contemplate all of this in embracing that particular mindset is a lonely one full of despair or constant angst where if you're waiting for an anarchist revolution globally not only will you be waiting for a longtime for a revolution that will never materialize you will be sorely disappointed to which your faith in humanity will be lost.

Human beings (majority) are psychologically weak, manipulative, and lazy where in the long run this is what caused me to lose all faith in anarchism. For a large majority human beings are incapable of anarchism. A majority of human beings know nothing beyond the master and slave relationship where most of the slaves cannot be liberated as they'll choose their own slavery every time.
A couple of issues: 1) couldn't the structre of society be part of the cattleness of the members? IOW if you are changing things, perhaps you would change things like education, where being hard working cattle is rewarded and being more lazy cattle is tolerated, but anything more creative or dynamic gets punished. 2) your solution is now to have a benevolent dictatorship and one that fosters a strong order - as yet not described, but that's fine. I suppose the idea would be that the elite or you alone would be able to be free and have the positive side of anarchism in their/your own life, while the masses live under rigid but kind rule. I am skeptical that it works out neatly like this. While the elites have tended to be anarchistic in the decadent sense their personalities seem rather rigid and boring. I think this in part due to their essense, but further I think that once you set yourself up as the controller/jailer/dictator your own freedom gets damaged, though in a more pampered and safe way then those you control. The dog walker is on one end of the leash.

My own response to point 1 would be that there would be some effects but there is something essential going on, but I am still interested in your response since essentialism is not easy to defend. In response to point 2, I think this is the case and was not just playing devil's advocate. It's not that I have a system suggestion. I just think at best yours is no better. Though since I don't know yet exactly what you mean, perhaps that will change. If you have explained how your dictatorship would work in a post, please link me.

It seems to me at best any new dictatorship will simple evolve/devolve (depending on one's perspective, into the oligarchy pretense democracies we have now. That is what they have done before, what about yours will prevent this?

I propose a hard socialist society where the dynamics are changed a bit but ultimately where the state cares for all citizens instead of powerful private interests running amuck dividing society internally from within. Such a state would return dignity, pride, and some semblance of social cohesion that the west hasn't had any of for almost three centuries now. Any elite aristocracy member that interferes with this process would be executed as they should be in order to maintain social order of the greater good. The west has tolerated the private oligarchic interests of the aristocracy for far too long and I seek to change all of that. Tolerance with them can no longer be afforded any more.

Such a dictatorship would be bottom up, not top down where a chancellor would be the supreme authority or guardian of the nation.
"I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2876 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. Zero_Sum wrote:I propose a hard socialist society where the dynamics are changed a bit but ultimately where the state cares for all citizens instead of powerful private interests running amuck dividing society internally from within. Such a state would return dignity, pride, and some semblance of social cohesion that the west hasn't had any of for almost three centuries now. Any elite aristocracy member that interferes with this process would be executed as they should be in order to maintain social order of the greater good. The west has tolerated the private oligarchic interests of the aristocracy for far too long and I seek to change all of that. Tolerance with them can no longer be afforded any more. Such a dictatorship would be bottom up, not top down where a chancellor would be the supreme authority or guardian of the nation. And how would it deal with dissent, alternative lifestyles - if it judged any that way - professors/journalists critical of the government, etc.? And to consolidate our two related discussions.... Zero_Sum wrote:Chaos is merely opportunity to destroy this world order in the creation of another one. It is a means to an end or goal. If this world order destroys all life on the planet through the chaos where revolution cannot be realized I can die calmly knowing this wasteland or abomination is gone forever. I'd rather see the entire planet eradicated of all life than to live the rest of my life under this current world order and for it to be the future of humanity. I'd rather see the world turned to ash. Now, that's dedication to an ideal you won't find from others. Then we stop the following.... Zero_Sum wrote: There's actually much to learn and gain from chaos. It happens during the transition and not after. We would no longer be learning from chaos. And my concerns above have to do with the things that often get viewed as chaos by regimes. Karpel Tunnel Philosopher Posts: 2624 Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. Karpel Tunnel wrote: Zero_Sum wrote:I propose a hard socialist society where the dynamics are changed a bit but ultimately where the state cares for all citizens instead of powerful private interests running amuck dividing society internally from within. Such a state would return dignity, pride, and some semblance of social cohesion that the west hasn't had any of for almost three centuries now. Any elite aristocracy member that interferes with this process would be executed as they should be in order to maintain social order of the greater good. The west has tolerated the private oligarchic interests of the aristocracy for far too long and I seek to change all of that. Tolerance with them can no longer be afforded any more. Such a dictatorship would be bottom up, not top down where a chancellor would be the supreme authority or guardian of the nation. And how would it deal with dissent, alternative lifestyles - if it judged any that way - professors/journalists critical of the government, etc.? And to consolidate our two related discussions.... Zero_Sum wrote:Chaos is merely opportunity to destroy this world order in the creation of another one. It is a means to an end or goal. If this world order destroys all life on the planet through the chaos where revolution cannot be realized I can die calmly knowing this wasteland or abomination is gone forever. I'd rather see the entire planet eradicated of all life than to live the rest of my life under this current world order and for it to be the future of humanity. I'd rather see the world turned to ash. Now, that's dedication to an ideal you won't find from others. Then we stop the following.... Zero_Sum wrote: There's actually much to learn and gain from chaos. It happens during the transition and not after. We would no longer be learning from chaos. And my concerns above have to do with the things that often get viewed as chaos by regimes. To be sure I indeed do believe in the suppression of free speech myself but not like the current advocates of silencing free speech. I would target cultural marxists, communists, zionists, multiculturalists,radical feminists(I would support a radically new kind of feminism, will write more on that later), gays(they'll be forced into private out of public view where it belongs), capitalists, libertarians, republicans, democrats, extreme individualists, and anybody that opposes the newly founded state. I wouldn't kill or imprison such individuals at least not as a first acting option but rather I would move them to fringe outliers of society where society would deem them the new tin foil cuckoos that nobody listens to. I would remove any kind of platform they have to disseminate their poisonous ideologies so that nobody would take them seriously limiting them to society's fringes where they can be controlled or contained. If anything I've learned from the best concerning today's censorship propagandists in what they have done to people like me for decades. What goes around, comes back around... The object of controlling or containing dissidents is not to kill them per say but instead to remove their ability to speak and express themselves. Without the ability to do either they become impotent and harmless where they're easily manageable. You're still focused on chaos, why? "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2876 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. Zero_Sum wrote:To be sure I indeed do believe in the suppression of free speech myself but not like the current advocates of silencing free speech. I would target cultural marxists, communists, zionists, multiculturalists,radical feminists(I would support a radically new kind of feminism, will write more on that later), gays(they'll be forced into private out of public view where it belongs), capitalists, libertarians, republicans, democrats, extreme individualists, and anybody that opposes the newly founded state. So unlike current advocates of silencing free speech, you have different targets. And perhaps, below, it seems, you'd be willing to have the state intervene. Many of them targets earlier in Western history and certainly targets now elsewhere. I wouldn't kill or imprison such individuals at least not as a first acting option but rather I would move them to fringe outliers of society where society would deem them the new tin foil cuckoos that nobody listens to. I would remove any kind of platform they have to disseminate their poisonous ideologies so that nobody would take them seriously limiting them to society's fringes where they can be controlled or contained. If anything I've learned from the best concerning today's censorship propagandists in what they have done to people like me for decades. What goes around, comes back around... And likely it would come around again. I don't think that is a stable solution. The object of controlling or containing dissidents is not to kill them per say but instead to remove their ability to speak and express themselves. Without the ability to do either they become impotent and harmless where they're easily manageable. If you, and others like you, are impotent and harmless then what you are suggesting will not come to pass. If the current suppression empowers and extends people like you, in some ways, then you are just suggesting a cycle of alternate suppressions. You're still focused on chaos, why? First, because I didn't see how a national socialist would positively view chaos. Your justification was that one could learn from it. This changed or the focus changed to being a transitional good as the old society fell, but would then be controlled. Around all this is when I hear calls for order and society based on order, at least from a historical perspective, I expect suppression of creativity, rigid control of children's minds, suppression of free speech, conformism, and cultural exaltation of the suppression of emotions. (much of this present today, but moves towards greater control of what gets seen as chaos can be even worse.) I see no reason to believe your system would be stable since it would create radical undergrounds, as it did earlier in history, where calls for democratization, freedom of speech and assembly would gain momentum and eventually, bloodily, overthrow the regime. My sense is we tried this and it did not work and was not stable. Karpel Tunnel Philosopher Posts: 2624 Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm ### Re: An Ex Anarchist Disavowing Anarchism. Karpel Tunnel wrote: Zero_Sum wrote:To be sure I indeed do believe in the suppression of free speech myself but not like the current advocates of silencing free speech. I would target cultural marxists, communists, zionists, multiculturalists,radical feminists(I would support a radically new kind of feminism, will write more on that later), gays(they'll be forced into private out of public view where it belongs), capitalists, libertarians, republicans, democrats, extreme individualists, and anybody that opposes the newly founded state. So unlike current advocates of silencing free speech, you have different targets. And perhaps, below, it seems, you'd be willing to have the state intervene. Many of them targets earlier in Western history and certainly targets now elsewhere. I wouldn't kill or imprison such individuals at least not as a first acting option but rather I would move them to fringe outliers of society where society would deem them the new tin foil cuckoos that nobody listens to. I would remove any kind of platform they have to disseminate their poisonous ideologies so that nobody would take them seriously limiting them to society's fringes where they can be controlled or contained. If anything I've learned from the best concerning today's censorship propagandists in what they have done to people like me for decades. What goes around, comes back around... And likely it would come around again. I don't think that is a stable solution. The object of controlling or containing dissidents is not to kill them per say but instead to remove their ability to speak and express themselves. Without the ability to do either they become impotent and harmless where they're easily manageable. If you, and others like you, are impotent and harmless then what you are suggesting will not come to pass. If the current suppression empowers and extends people like you, in some ways, then you are just suggesting a cycle of alternate suppressions. You're still focused on chaos, why? First, because I didn't see how a national socialist would positively view chaos. Your justification was that one could learn from it. This changed or the focus changed to being a transitional good as the old society fell, but would then be controlled. Around all this is when I hear calls for order and society based on order, at least from a historical perspective, I expect suppression of creativity, rigid control of children's minds, suppression of free speech, conformism, and cultural exaltation of the suppression of emotions. (much of this present today, but moves towards greater control of what gets seen as chaos can be even worse.) I see no reason to believe your system would be stable since it would create radical undergrounds, as it did earlier in history, where calls for democratization, freedom of speech and assembly would gain momentum and eventually, bloodily, overthrow the regime. My sense is we tried this and it did not work and was not stable. Yes, different targets. My ideology differs significantly against those in power now. They have their vision of a new world order where I have my own which is why I oppose them. Stability is all in the eye of the beholder, we will never attain a completely stable world as nobody can agree on anything in consensus. Global stability will never be realized. Nonetheless I am a nationalist where when I say new world order I mean for a nation state unlike those in power currently where when they say new world order they mean it quite literally for the entire planet. Alternative suppression? Yes, you could call it that. You're right people like me currently have no power to enact anything but that could change as we enter the global technological dark age of chaos and social upheaval. We only have to wait for the right opportunity or moment from the shadows to places ourselves in positions to enact our collective agenda. It's what other groups have done in the past and we're learning from our mistakes in the past so the next time around we rise we'll be able to hold onto power indefinitely. Positive aspects of chaos would be the current power structure losing all of its power in one full swoop whether this be economically, through a global conflict, or incitement of civil war and perhaps a combination of all three which is the more likely scenario. This chaos is good for people like me because it allows us the ability to do things and put things in motion that we're unable to do presently. This is why temporary chaos and anarchy is good for opportunistic revolutionaries. Those currently in power did the same with the aftermath of World War II and the 1930's economic depression. What's coming now right around the corner will be much more worse concerning this chaos I speak of which will make fulfilling our agenda all that much more easier. I like to think of people with my particular mindset as an invisible army lying and waiting for the most perfect opportunistic time to strike. There will be of course dissidents to my perceived new world order but as I've said if anything I've learned how to deal with those people from the best propagandists of the current power structure. Living in the ghetto societal confines of the current power structure all these years I've learned their methodologies, strategies, and tactics quite well dealing with dissidents. I merely only have to adapt them to my ideology and voila. Like any great hunter dealing with a dangerous animal or powerful adversary you wait for when either are so mortally wounded and crippled for activating the final fatal blow, all you must do is set up a trap and wait patiently. Like a rising phoenix we will rise from the ashes, the fire will burn once again. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$

Zero_Sum
Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire.

Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America.