— A call to Frighter and all of you anarchists out there. Is anarchism a humanism? Or are anarchists just out for what they can get?
well depends at how ya look at anarchism. alota anarchists i think stem their beliefs as it being a kind of “utopian” kind of thing, which in that case i think it is a humanism. but i think of anarchy because i reject the concept of right or wrong or any kind, which means no rights at all (hence the problem with the animal thing), or higher power to make somone better then anyone else. With that in mind, how can anyone tell me what i can and can not do and be justified in telling me so.
— One thing that impressed me in our animal rights thing is in social contract theory a thing may not be inherently be “right” or “wrong”, we just consider it that way so everyone can get along, but anarchists tend to disdain artificial constructs which does not mean they don’t use them on a daily basis.
yah kinda sucks being an anarchist. just kinda sucks when somone is being racist or something… and i can only kinda shrug my shoulders if i believe in what i believe, while at the same time wantin to slap em.
im a philosophical anarchist. ( i say this because i cannot fully comprehend practical anarchism…) my points are gonan be very simplistic and are a matter of my opinion.
i would say that yes anarchism is humanistic.
anarchism challenges the right of those who rule over others. philosophical anarchism respects the phenomena of existence and every mans right to live freely and authentically, to not be subjected to anyones authority/exploitation. (authority meaning rule/power). in this sense, it is humanistic.
in anarchism, it is the state and the institutes (and for some, capitalism) that causes alienation and exploitation. the overthrowing of the institutions is in favour of better human living conditions and quality of life. as anarchism is meant to be reached after years and years of progress (akin to the hegellian dialectic), mindsets will change and people will no longer depends on iron laws to govern their actions but instead judge their actions based on the well being of themselves and others…
the right of man to be free. everyman rules… himself that is. anarchism is humanistic.
heh i think its funny how that if anarchy was to come about, capitalism would be 200x what it is now. Without government to hold it back, corporations would rein free. it would be a TRUE free market then.
Yes, I think thats a valid point. It’s hard to be a radical and have to participate in an authoritarian system everyday, but I suppose the failure of the authoritarian system attracted me to radial politics in the first place.
— Good post Jedi. You have defended anarchism quite well.
— Frighter. That is one of the problems with a democracy, you have to tolerate the intolerable.
— Metavoid. Thank you for thoroughly understanding and responding to that point; And in your elaboration of that point i would like to add— How far does a radical go in fighting against that authoritarianism, how much is too much?