You're viewing part of a thread.
I'm using communism as a bit of a catch-all term. the specifics are not my concern so long as the people hold the power.
and i disagree with your statement there. human nature is whatever we do with it. there's nothing natural about capitalism.
I didn't say anything about capitalism being natural. I said the final stage, anarcho-syndicalism, is probably unachievable. And no, human nature is not whatever we do with it. You will not just make things like jealousy, violent tendencies, the need to be controlled, and people fearing those different from them magically disappear. There will be people like that regardless of how you wish to remake the world unless you find a way to genetically engineer it all out of us. Because all of those things go back to our primate roots.
i didn't mean to imply you said capitalism is natural. i meant there's nothing natural about it yet the entire world revolves around it and has been for quite a while. if you put a system in place human nature is irrelevant. murder is "natural". we have laws against it. anarchism shouldn't be just total chaos, it just removes unnecessary hierarchies.
things like jealousy and violence are usually linked to economic and social hardship, and in a fair economic and free social system it should either go away or be the result of psychological problems which should have remedies in an anarchist system as well.
Psychological problems only have humane remedies in such a system if the person with the problem agrees to the remedy. What if they don't?
i don't agree. if you're an aggressor, it's not inhumane to require you to stop. a free society doesn't mean you're free to hurt people.
Require how? How would this be enforced?
i don't know man, some sort of social worker takes them away. you're asking me specifics like I'm going to build my own society right now.
I'm trying to point out the flaw here. If you give the social worker the power to do that, suddenly you're creating power hierarchies, which goes against the whole idea.
no it doesn't. not necessarily, anyway. authorities don't need to automatically vanish in an anarchy. instead they may need to prove the purpose of their existence. there is literature on non-state justice systems. communism and anarchism comes from thinkers, economists and philosophers. it's not like they didn't just think of crime at all.
If you have power hierarchies and authorities, it is no longer anarcho-syndicalism. So I think you're proving my point. Also, when would these social workers with this authority ever vanish? After some sort of eugenics program to eliminate all dangerous mental illnesses from humanity?
Education?
How do you educate away violent mental illness?
To quote you: "You will not just make things like jealousy, violent tendencies, the need to be controlled, and people fearing those different from them magically disappear."
Please point to the words 'violent mental illness' in your original post. Now take your yellow highlighter pen and color it on your screen. Actually, use a Sharpie - what the hell. Maybe next time you'll see it and remember not to speak out of turn.
If you mean to say that 'violent tendencies' is necessarily equivalent to 'violent mental illness', I would counter that they are two different things. I would say that people in the armed forces have violent tendencies. Police officers have violent tendencies. But violent mental illness is a completely different thing. Violent mental illness implies that the violence is not a rational response to the situation at hand.
So, sorry I took away your little 'Gotcha!" moment.
Okay, well you can counter it but that is still what I meant to say.
And I didn't do any sort of gotcha comment. That's not something I do. I resent the suggestion. If you're going to just make uncivil accusations, we can stop this right now.
Dude, it's your ball. Take it and go if you're upset.