Anarchy Makes me Panicky

[Middle Class Values]

I am a moral member of society. I work hard and happily pay taxes to defend our country against invaders and foreigners.

You anarchists should have a good look at yourselves. Do you want criminal types roaming the streets in gangs preying on middle class families?

What the world needs is more laws, not fewer. Anarchists, have a good hard look at yourselves. The comments on this website are just juvenile blather.

[MilitancyFetish]

Spare us the self-righteous, moralistic sermon. Your clumsy attempt to frame yourself as the spokesperson of the moral majority is pathetic and laughable. If you are unable to engage in theoretical debate without being patronizing and manipulative, then don't blame <i>us</i> if we don't take you seriously. Perhaps the one in need of "looking at him/herself" is you. Of course, since you clearly are so morally pure and good, I suppose it is a foregone conclusion that you have nothing to answer for.

[Yuda]

I think somone needs a nice cup of tea and a lie down

[MilitancyFetish]

I think somone needs a nice cup of tea and a lie down

I take it you mean me?

[Middle Class Values]

So typical of the anarchist mentality. Good, morally correct people such as myself are subjected to the language of the gutter.

No wonder my parents used to cover our ears while they hustled us past the hectoring anarchists who would loudly profess their twisted beliefs on the main street.

So what is wrong with strong morals and family values? Why shoud I, who is morally correct, take heed of you who is morally weak? Take a good look at yourself anarchists.

[|Y|]

Funny troll at least.

[MilitancyFetish]

So what is wrong with strong morals and family values?

Well, for starters, they cause you to talk to people with who you disagree in a patronizing, whiny, and self-righteous tone. Case in point: this thread. Beyond that, read the entire first essay of Frederich Nietzsche's <i>On The Genealogy of Morals</i> and then I might <i>consider</I> debating with you.

[Middle Class Values]

That Neitzche fellow was a Nazi. I'm not interested in his opinions on morals. Like all good middle class people I don't approve of nazism. Again, have a good look at yourself and your ridiculous name "militancyfetish" before you begin casting aspersions at your moral superiors.

[Yuda]

I think somone needs a nice cup of tea and a lie down

I take it you mean me?

Nah Middle Class Values I thought he sounded like he needed a good strong cuppa, but if you feel like one be my guest

[K=x'uksami]

That Neitzche fellow was a Nazi. I'm not interested in his opinions on morals. Like all good middle class people I don't approve of nazism. Again, have a good look at yourself and your ridiculous name "militancyfetish" before you begin casting aspersions at your moral superiors.

Well, as I understand it, he wasn't a Nazi per se as the Nazis didn't even exist until years after he was dead. Then again, I'm not sure how he fits into anarchism (and if anything, Genealogy of Morals would hardly come off as anarchistic, given that it attacks the very values that anarchism is based on, doesn't it?).

[MilitancyFetish]

Genealogy of Morals would hardly come off as anarchistic, given that it attacks the very values that anarchism is based on, doesn't it?).

In and of itself, it <i>isn't anarchistic</i>. In fact, Nietzsche himself speaks glowingly about the Roman Empire and the invading army of Napoleon. However, these are more peripheral expressions of personal opinion than points that lie at the core of his argument. His central goal of tracing the social/cultural evolution of "morality" as a concept is still of much relevance to anarchism. In fact, before Nietzsche wrote <i>Genealogy</I> Max Stirner had already written <I>The Ego and His Own</i> which also traces the evolution of morality as a concept, but through an explicitly anti-authoritarian lens. The reason why I suggested Nietzsche is because the first essay of <i>Genealogy</i> is a hell of a lot easier to tackle than the entire text of <i>The Ego and His Own</i> (which I haven't finished yet). Even if Nietzsche himself <i>embraces</I> values contrary to anarchism, his theoretical critique does not in any pose a threat to anarchist ideas. Like I said, his authoritarian views are presented as more of a sidebar than anything else.

[MilitancyFetish]

That Neitzche fellow was a Nazi.

No he wasn't. Nietzsche's sister Elizabeth was a Nazi. In final years of Nietzsche's life, he suffered a mental breakdown and his sister took over editorial control of his work. She is the one responsible for creating the misconception that Nietzsche supported Nazism. Nietzsche himself denounced his sister's anti-Semitism in a letter that he wrote to her in his final years:

You have committed one of the greatest stupidities—for yourself and for me! Your association with an anti-Semitic chief expresses a foreignness to my whole way of life which fills me again and again with ire or melancholy. … It is a matter of honor with me to be absolutely clean and unequivocal in relation to anti-Semitism, namely, opposed to it, as I am in my writings. I have recently been persecuted with letters and Anti-Semitic Correspondence Sheets. My disgust with this party (which would like the benefit of my name only too well) is as pronounced as possible.

—Friedrich Nietzsche, Letter to His Sister, Christmas 1887

I'm not interested in his opinions on morals.

Very well. Then I'm not interested in yours.

Again, have a good look at yourself and your ridiculous name "militancyfetish" before you begin casting aspersions at your moral superiors.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprized that you don't recognize irony when you see it. Picking up on subtle nuances isn't exactly your strong suit. As for your claim about your "moral superiority," you can be as blindly adament as you want about the truth of this claim and I'll still just laugh in your face. It's no skin off <i>my</i> ass.

[Middle Class Values]

Look, I don't like this "militancy" thing or this sick "fetish" of yours. As a proud upholder of middleclass morality and values both of these terms have a high "yuck" factor. Anarchism itself suggests moral decay, ill-kept lawns and paper-strewn streets. To an upstanding citizen such as myself who happily obeys the letter of the law the inherent untidiness of anarchism is repulsive.

The world is dangerous and unsafe. Bad people lurk in every corner. It is only the law which protects us from the predatory behaviour of the working classes. Anarchy would deliver the masses a license to torment and encircle morally superior members of my class - the middle class.

The prospect of anarchy is bad enough, but this "fetish" thinking is completely appalling to someone such as myself who wholeheartedly embraces middle-class beliefs and sustains a superior morality. Frankly, some proto-nazi's thoughts on the subject are of no interest to a person of my high moral values.

[K=x'uksami]

Look, I don't like this "militancy" thing or this sick "fetish" of yours. As a proud upholder of middleclass morality and values both of these terms have a high "yuck" factor. Anarchism itself suggests moral decay, ill-kept lawns and paper-strewn streets. To an upstanding citizen such as myself who happily obeys the letter of the law the inherent untidiness of anarchism is repulsive.

The name is not literal I think he said it was a sarcastic response to critics who told him that he focused too much on action and not enough on what he considered pointless discussion. They accused him of having a "militancy fetish" or something or so I recall. In any case, it has nothing to do with a fetish for machine guns.

The prospect of anarchy is bad enough, but this "fetish" thinking is completely appalling to someone such as myself who wholeheartedly embraces middle-class beliefs and sustains a superior morality. Frankly, some proto-nazi's thoughts on the subject are of no interest to a person of my high moral values.

Proto-Nazi? He's an anarchist, how the hell can he be fascist?

In and of itself, it isn't anarchistic. In fact, Nietzsche himself speaks glowingly about the Roman Empire and the invading army of Napoleon. However, these are more peripheral expressions of personal opinion than points that lie at the core of his argument. His central goal of tracing the social/cultural evolution of "morality" as a concept is still of much relevance to anarchism. In fact, before Nietzsche wrote Genealogy Max Stirner had already written The Ego and His Own which also traces the evolution of morality as a concept, but through an explicitly anti-authoritarian lens. The reason why I suggested Nietzsche is because the first essay of Genealogy is a hell of a lot easier to tackle than the entire text of The Ego and His Own (which I haven't finished yet). Even if Nietzsche himself embraces values contrary to anarchism, his theoretical critique does not in any pose a threat to anarchist ideas. Like I said, his authoritarian views are presented as more of a sidebar than anything else.

I see, so it isn't his values that you're focusing on, but his method of critiquing morality. I was under the impression that the book was intended to show that egalitarian values were the product of resentment and destructive desires, though.

[Guest]

I'm sure there are ways to turn machineguns into sex toys ... and decadent misuse beats murderous use any day.