by Guest » Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:35 pm
Tom Palven wrote:Fuck the dictionaries. Fuck defining our terms.
non sequitur. fuck the dictionaries; let's define our own terms. what's really sad is that nobody disagrees with your definition of anarchism. it does mean no rulers. the problem is that you're incapable of expanding that concept beyond 'da gubmint' bogeyman, whereas most anarchists see the state as just one expression of hierarchy, of which all expressions constitute a form of rule to be opposed. when there's a class of people who own the planet, and the rest of us must grovel at their doorstep for our sustenance, as proudhon put it, then they are in fact our rulers -- even if we 'voluntarily' contract to labor for them or pay them for the use of 'their' resources.
that's the disconnect between us. in short: expand your mind.
[quote="Tom Palven"]Fuck the dictionaries. Fuck defining our terms.[/quote]
non sequitur. fuck the dictionaries; let's define our own terms. what's really sad is that nobody disagrees with your definition of anarchism. it does mean no rulers. the problem is that you're incapable of expanding that concept beyond 'da gubmint' bogeyman, whereas most anarchists see the state as just one expression of hierarchy, of which all expressions constitute a form of rule to be opposed. when there's a class of people who own the planet, and the rest of us must grovel at their doorstep for our sustenance, as proudhon put it, then they are in fact our rulers -- even if we 'voluntarily' contract to labor for them or pay them for the use of 'their' resources.
that's the disconnect between us. in short: expand your mind.