Crap Anarchism

[birthday pony]

I don't understand what you're saying Francois. How do you envision having children raised?

[Francois Tremblay]

I don't envision anything. We have no alternative system (with very minor exceptions), we're thousands of years behind, and no one will ever admit there is a problem. It's a totally hopeless situation insofar as activism is concerned, which is why I don't talk about it very much.

[Yarrow]

well that's a bit defeatist isn't it?

i think the answer lies between two extremes. what i mean is, the family should be supported more strongly by the community. people should be more open to criticism and suggestions, and children should feel able to talk to other adults as they do to their peers. children are isolated, disrespected and over-protected in our current society- whilst being bombarded with diabolical fables and role models.

[Yuda]

Half the anarchists I know have kids, myself included

[Francois Tremblay]

Half the anarchists I know have kids, myself included

Well, I don't know what to say to that. I guess tradition often wins out against ideals.

[Yuda]

Half the anarchists I know have kids, myself included

Well, I don't know what to say to that. I guess tradition often wins out against ideals.

No it's called life, it's what we do when not punching in 1's and 0's

[Yarrow]

i sympathise with seeing a problem, yet not knowing an answer, but you surely must at least know what direction you'd like us to move in?

[Francois Tremblay]

Half the anarchists I know have kids, myself included

Well, I don't know what to say to that. I guess tradition often wins out against ideals.

No it's called life, it's what we do when not punching in 1's and 0's

Breeding and being in total control of other human beings is not "life." It's certainly not part of the new sort of living that Anarchists should be proposing to the world. If your Anarchism is not just an ideal tucked in the back of your head and you believe in anything at all, it must be that human beings should not go around deliberately controlling each other.

[Yuda]

Breeding and being in total control of other human beings is not "life." It's certainly not part of the new sort of living that Anarchists should be proposing to the world. If your Anarchism is not just an ideal tucked in the back of your head and you believe in anything at all, it must be that human beings should not go around deliberately controlling each other.

If anyone I knew that had a fair grasp on anarchism said that, I would be astounded or assume they were a primmie of some description. You it doesn't suprise me.

For someone who says they don't you certainly believe in a lot of absolutes

[Francois Tremblay]

Yuda, you are fucking pissing me off with your superior attitude.

If believing that one should not seek to control others shows that one does not have a "fair grasp on Anarchy," then I'd rather NOT have a fair grasp on Anarchy. If you believe that Anarchy is about controlling others, then I don't want your Anarchy. It's your pure invention. You made it up.

I believe that every single individual should be free to self-organize to achieve their goals instead of using the statist methods of control on each other. That's what I believe is Anarchy- a society that is self-organized under socialist principles, without governments or corporations or any hierarchy whatsoever. If you want to accuse me of not having a "fair grasp on Anarchy," then tell me what I am.

You're a moderator here. Apparently you know what you're talking about. If you don't believe what I described is Anarchy, then tell me what I really am and if the answer is not "you're an Anarchist," I will get the fuck out of here. How about that?

And if I am an Anarchist and you are attacking me for who knows what personal reason (maybe because you don't like Market Anarchists, or whatever), then I will not stand for being bullied. I did not stand for it with Yarrow and I will not stand for it with you.

Then again, if you believe that Anarchy is compatible with control, I can't blame you for attacking people: that's what control is all about.

[birthday pony]

I'm sorry Francois, but the only way to perpetuate a society is to have children. Nature is to blame if anything. And we all die too. Nature is a murderer, but nobody seems to be addressing that problem.

Now, given that we can't have a society without people and we can't have people without having kids, I'd say we're pretty much stuck with having kids. And I think there's a right way to do it. When parents set rules it seldom stops a teenager from doing something. I think once the kid is a teenager rules give way to advice while the parents continue to provide shelter and maybe food.

Before adolescence it's obvious that parents are needed. The plain and simple fact is that a new born child cannot exist without a parent. Even young children cannot exist without parents. They'll either not be able to feed themselves and die or they'll do something stupid like jump into a pool when they don't know how to swim. Teenagers might be able to provide a little better as far as being able to feed themselves, but there are still developmental things going on in their little heads. So it doesn't hurt to have parents to provide shelter and give guidance, not be authoritarian.

[Francois Tremblay]

Come on, every single breeding advocates says that. Do you seriously believe I'll go "oh, I never heard that before, I guess you must be right"? No, I think it's very silly to believe that if anti-breeding catches on there'll be no more births. Obviously some people will always disagree with any position, and will have children regardless, because of the (mostly manufactured by indoctrination and tradition) drive to have children. If you're going to argue for breeding, at least bring original arguments to the table.

Read some of our objections before you argue any further:
link

[birthday pony]

The chart is my favourtie part.

I'm not trying to make you want to have kids. I don't even know if I want to have kids, but there is no other way we are going to continue existing as a species. If there's no species there's no reason for any kind of philosophy about how said species should interact. Having kids requires parenting. I realize I'm not the first person to say that, but you haven't addressed an alternative or anything of the sort.

It just seems like you're saying we stop breeding, then there's no more humans, then all of our problems are solved.

[Francois Tremblay]

BP, you apparently did not read my last post, because I pointed out to you why that's bullshit. Not everyone would stop breeding even if the anti-breeding ideal became popular. There will always be human beings around. We could not convince everyone to not breed, any more than the State has been able to convince everyone fertile to breed. It's just a ridiculous idea.

As for the issue of the end of humanity, the people at VHEMT would like to see it happen. I sympathize with their goals because they are anti-breeding, but I don't think anti-breeding alone can bring about the end of humanity. You'd have to also actively kill breeders, and I obviously don't support any such actions (never mind the impossibility of organizing such systematic killings).

[birthday pony]

BP, you apparently did not read my last post, because I pointed out to you why that's bullshit. Not everyone would stop breeding even if the anti-breeding ideal became popular. There will always be human beings around. We could not convince everyone to not breed, any more than the State has been able to convince everyone fertile to breed. It's just a ridiculous idea.

As for the issue of the end of humanity, the people at VHEMT would like to see it happen. I sympathize with their goals because they are anti-breeding, but I don't think anti-breeding alone can bring about the end of humanity. You'd have to also actively kill breeders, and I obviously don't support any such actions (never mind the impossibility of organizing such systematic killings).

Yeah but anti-breeding is a cop-out. We have the ability to make our existence more efficient without making our numbers smaller. The whole anti-breeding thing is so blatantly elitist it's funny. That's why I liked the chart. It not only assumed that it knew every single person who wants to have children and their motivation, it made all of their motives negative. I think telling others not to breed instead of working to make one's own life more efficient is lazy.