Crap Anarchism

[Francois Tremblay]

"Yeah but anti-breeding is a cop-out. We have the ability to make our existence more efficient without making our numbers smaller."

"More efficient"? What in the hell does efficiency have to do with it? We're talking about freedom, not efficiency: these are opposite goals. If our standard is efficiency, then we might as well all surrender to the economic experts and let them all rule our lives.


"The whole anti-breeding thing is so blatantly elitist it's funny."

Elitist? How is it not elitist for breeders to presume that their genes are so precious that they should be reproduced? How is it not elitist to impose children on society? You tell me that.


"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."

That's because there is no positive motive to have children. I have never seen any, anyway.


"I think telling others not to breed instead of working to make one's own life more efficient is lazy."

How is it lazy to want to improve society?

[Yarrow]

what is your alternative francois? i read your posts and i can't see one. ps. i'll say what i like, you say what you like. if you could find your way to not swear and insult me, i'd appreciate it. but adding the word 'fuck' into your posts is not, in my eyes, a persuasive tool. you should read up about..is it 'persuasive communication'? you can find it in the pdf of anarchism in action, second draft.

[birthday pony]

"Yeah but anti-breeding is a cop-out. We have the ability to make our existence more efficient without making our numbers smaller."

"More efficient"? What in the hell does efficiency have to do with it? We're talking about freedom, not efficiency: these are opposite goals. If our standard is efficiency, then we might as well all surrender to the economic experts and let them all rule our lives.

It seems like a big problem anti-breeders have is that children take up a lot of resources. We have the ability to change that while still having children.

"The whole anti-breeding thing is so blatantly elitist it's funny."

Elitist? How is it not elitist for breeders to presume that their genes are so precious that they should be reproduced? How is it not elitist to impose children on society? You tell me that.

Why is it imposing children on society? I think most people just want to create something which is why they have children. They want to continue existence and create life. Not pass down their "pure" or "precious" genes or whatever you think they want to do.

I'm sorry if you don't like children, but some people do. And whether or not someone else wants to have children is no business of yours. So instead of complaining about people that want to breed why don't you start correcting things that you yourself are in control of?

"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."

That's because there is no positive motive to have children. I have never seen any, anyway.

Maybe you don't want to have children. That's cool. You don't have to. By all means don't. But if someone wants to, why is it bad? What is negative about wanting to create life?

"I think telling others not to breed instead of working to make one's own life more efficient is lazy."

How is it lazy to want to improve society?

It's not. Please, transfer that desire to create change into actually creating change. Make society a better place. Society, of course, meaning humans. Which are, you guessed it, made by breeding. But no children is not an improvement to society. It is a surefire way to end society. Except of course,

Not everyone would stop breeding even if the anti-breeding ideal became popular. There will always be human beings around.

You base your anti-breeding position on the premise that it won't be successful. Having kids hurts society, but without breeding we won't have a society. But there will always be people who breed, therefore hurt society. So when is the problem solved? When people stop breeding and there are no humans? Once again, what exactly are you saying is the problem? Don't adults take up as many resources and cause as many problems as children? Should we all kill ourselves?

There are reason to have kids and not to. Both are legit, and they both work for different people. If you don't want to have kids don't, but don't assume that everyone that does have kids is an idiot with ulterior motives.

[Francois Tremblay]

It seems like a big problem anti-breeders have is that children take up a lot of resources.

Yes, of course. They take resources that could be used to important areas.

We have the ability to change that while still having children.

Impossible. If you have children, you have to feed them, educate them, lodge them. You cannot escape that.

Why is it imposing children on society?

What, you think we want to be saddled with your semen-fruit?

I think most people just want to create something which is why they have children. They want to continue existence and create life. Not pass down their "pure" or "precious" genes or whatever you think they want to do.

If you wanna create something, then be an artist. Be an inventor. Go out there and do what you love. Leave the children alone.

I'm sorry if you don't like children, but some people do. And whether or not someone else wants to have children is no business of yours.

Whether or not someone else wants to be a slave to the capital-democratic state is no business of yours. Instead of complaining about people who want to control you, why don't you start correcting things in your life?

Same stupid argument. Breeding does affect not only the individual, but the children, and society. It is a business of ours, just like all other forms of control are.

Maybe you don't want to have children. That's cool. You don't have to. By all means don't. But if someone wants to, why is it bad? What is negative about wanting to create life?

Haven't you been following? I've been talking about this on this thread for a while now. There is plenty of negative for the "parent," for the child and for society as a whole. And most importantly, it is anti-Anarchist.

It's not. Please, transfer that desire to create change into actually creating change. Make society a better place.

How about you do that instead of putting your semen where it doesn't belong?

Society, of course, meaning humans. Which are, you guessed it, made by breeding. But no children is not an improvement to society. It is a surefire way to end society.

I already explained why that's a bullshit argument. Since you are using it, I must conclude that you are trying to bullshit everyone.

You base your anti-breeding position on the premise that it won't be successful.

Um... no. Why the fuck would you even say that? When have I based my position on the premise that it wouldn't be successful? That doesn't even make any sense. The fact that not everyone agrees with ANY position is merely used by me as the proof that society would not cease to exist as a result of my position. NOT as an argument.

I never, ever said that it was my reason for being anti-breeding. I am anti-breeding because it is anti-Anarchist, not because "it won't be successful." Honestly, I cannot conceive of anyone coming to that conclusion just by reading what I wrote, so I think you're being an asshole on purpose here.

[birthday pony]

Francois, I am really trying to see what you're saying. Maybe I was unclear. Let me try again.

My point is not that children require zero resources, but less than they usually receive. Notice that I said
"It seems like a big problem anti-breeders have is that children take up a lot of resources." Not that they take no resources. We can work towards reducing resource use without reducing the birth rate. But regardless, anti-breeding would solve the resource problem. That, however, is not my point.


There's a few quotes I'm going to address as a whole.

(1)What, you think we want to be saddled with your semen-fruit? (2) Whether or not someone else wants to be a slave to the capital-democratic state is no business of yours. Instead of complaining about people who want to control you, why don't you start correcting things in your life? Same stupid argument. Breeding does affect not only the individual, but the children, and society. It is a business of ours, just like all other forms of control are. (3) How about you do that instead of putting your semen where it doesn't belong?

Seriously? Okay, this is your big beef? Not that single CEOs take up more resources than 6 person lower-middle class families, not that adults with no children are using more resources and directly affecting you, Francois, way more than a single mom's child is? Your beef is with people having kids. You think that it is a worth while and inherently anarchist position to have railing against people that wish to continue society the only way they know how?

The current capitalist system and it's failures have hurt businesses like restaurants. Being a busboy this directly affects my tips since people can't go out to eat as much or tip as much as they used to. A waitress I work with has a kid. That doesn't affect me at all, other than I chose not to smoke by her since she is young and more prone to illness from second hand smoke. Does my friend's child affect you? How so?


You tell me not to put my semen where it "doesn't belong."
Which begs the question: where does it belong?

If you wanna create something, then be an artist. Be an inventor. Go out there and do what you love. Leave the children alone.

I'm quite positive that making art doesn't quite add up to creating an entirely new life. Not being a parent I can't say definitively. We could ask someone on the board who is a parent to check.


Then there's this bit:

(1) I already explained why that's (breeding as a way of continuing society) a bullshit argument. Since you are using it, I must conclude that you are trying to bullshit everyone. (2) I am anti-breeding because it is anti-Anarchist, not because "it won't be successful." Honestly, I cannot conceive of anyone coming to that conclusion just by reading what I wrote, so I think you're being an asshole on purpose here. (3) Haven't you been following? I've been talking about this on this thread for a while now. There is plenty of negative for the "parent," for the child and for society as a whole. And most importantly, it is anti-Anarchist.

(1) Francois, please. Can we stay open to discussion instead of resorting to calling the other side's arguments bullshit? I sincerely may have missed where you said that. Could you point out the quote maybe? I just went through the whole part of the thread where we've been talking about children and I can't find a place where you explain how society is suppose to continue, other than by breeding.

(2) You've only said that society will continue because people will continue to breed, admitting that people will not always be anti-breeding. I am simply saying that you admit people will continue breeding Is there something I missed? How do you see society continuing without parenting? Will we have kids and leave them in a field to fend for themselves?

(3) Sometimes Anarchy means burning the black flag. Hell, if it did catch on I might conceive simply based on the premise that someone might not want me to.

Think what you want Francois. I could tell you I'm not trying to be an asshole, but you can choose to believe me or not. Just know, I am willing to continue the discussion and if it ends it's on you, at least until I say I'm sick of it. And I'm not sick of it. I want to understand what you're saying.

Basically I just have one thing I don't get: how does society continue without breeding?

[Francois Tremblay]

Seriously? Okay, this is your big beef?

No, my "big beef" is that breeding is anti-Anarchist. The waste of resources is just an added problem.

Not that single CEOs take up more resources than 6 person lower-middle class families, not that adults with no children are using more resources and directly affecting you, Francois, way more than a single mom's child is?

I never said I supported CEOs. As for your adults with no children comment, I don't know what it's supposed to mean.

Your beef is with people having kids. You think that it is a worth while and inherently anarchist position to have railing against people that wish to continue society the only way they know how?

Are you saying breeding comes from mere ignorance of better ways to continue society? I really doubt that.

A waitress I work with has a kid. That doesn't affect me at all, other than I chose not to smoke by her since she is young and more prone to illness from second hand smoke. Does my friend's child affect you? How so?

I don't see what smoking has to do with the issue. But of course all children affect me. Children are the most innocent human beings and the most persecuted.

Which begs the question: where does it belong?

If you don't know where to put your semen after you masturbate, I really, really don't want to come to your house. Seriously, what the hell?

I'm quite positive that making art doesn't quite add up to creating an entirely new life.

You don't need to create "new life" to be a creative person. That's such a god-complex.

(1) Francois, please. Can we stay open to discussion instead of resorting to calling the other side's arguments bullshit?

I call something bullshit when it's bullshit. That's all. The argument is always brought up by the breeders and it's always refuted, but it keeps coming.

I sincerely may have missed where you said that. Could you point out the quote maybe? I just went through the whole part of the thread where we've been talking about children and I can't find a place where you explain how society is suppose to continue, other than by breeding.

I never said anything about the means to "continue society." What does that have to do with the fact that some breeding will always occur?

(2) You've only said that society will continue because people will continue to breed, admitting that people will not always be anti-breeding. I am simply saying that you admit people will continue breeding Is there something I missed? How do you see society continuing without parenting? Will we have kids and leave them in a field to fend for themselves?

We're not discussing parenting, so this is another red herring. Keep to the topic.

(3) Sometimes Anarchy means burning the black flag. Hell, if it did catch on I might conceive simply based on the premise that someone might not want me to.

This makes no sense whatsoever. I don't see what burning flags has to do with this. Either you are anti-hierachy or you're not.

Your last sentence is horrifying. Determining the course of your next twenty years by participating in a system of coercion and control because some random person says it's immoral is one of the most psychologically fucked up thing I have seen, and I have talked to plenty of people with psychological issues.

Think what you want Francois. I could tell you I'm not trying to be an asshole

Actually, I thought that before, but now I'm starting to think you have serious psychological issues.

Just know, I am willing to continue the discussion and if it ends it's on you, at least until I say I'm sick of it.

I see absolutely no point in our conversation, since all you do is keep rehashing the basic breeder arguments ("but we'd die out!" "I want a mini-me!"), accompanied by some bizarre non sequiturs. I'd prefer to talk about your childhood. But I guess that's probably not what you have in mind.

Basically I just have one thing I don't get: how does society continue without breeding?

If you're just going to repeat the same bullshit over and over, I'm not going to answer it.

For the last time, as I pointed out many times before on this thread, breeding will always exist. There will always be people who will breed regardless of the prevalent beliefs, just like there will always be murderers, rapists and politicians. Since it is an impossible situation, there is no point in discussing it.

(and no, I do not believe this makes anti-breeding "unsuccessful" any more than I believe the fact that not everyone is an Anarchist makes Anarchism "unsuccessful"- whatever that means)

[birthday pony]

So, society will continue because some people will breed no matter what. Now I have another question:
Is it important that society continues to exist?

[birthday pony]

P.S.

(3) Sometimes Anarchy means burning the black flag.

This makes no sense whatsoever. I don't see what burning flags has to do with this. Either you are anti-hierachy or you're not.

Hahahahaha.


Francois, look past the fabric aspect of a flag. Think of what flags stand for. Sometimes a counter-movement, even an anti-hierarchy movement, can create a culture of beliefs that are just as structured and restrictive as the culture it's fighting. Sometimes it's good to criticize a Anarchy from the inside instead of blindly disregard anything that is "Anti-anarchy".

"but we'd die out!" "I want a mini-me!"

And for the five millionth time, I AM SEVENTEEN YEARS OLD. At the moment I am not particularly interested in having children. This is not a personal discussion for me, I'm trying to keep it objective. Notice that I haven't argued in the first person until the last post, which was only in response to your reply in which you told me where my semen does and doesn't belong, why the world doesn't need my semen, and other odd semen related things. Please quit thinking I am arguing out of my non-existent desire to have kids.

[Yarrow]

"Which begs the question: where does it belong?"



If you don't know where to put your semen after you masturbate, I really, really don't want to come to your house. Seriously, what the hell?

bwa-ha-ha. i believe the uterus is in fact the proper place for ejaculate. the toilet is not. to quote billy bragg;

we were upstairs in the bedroom, dancing disgusted
and flushing our babies down the drain
the apple that don't wanna get eaten
will still fall off the tree
when you're in as deep as we are, honey,
it's so easy to get washed out to sea

seriously though, i guess FT is saying he personally has adopted a stance of anti-breeding. does this mean no sex, or is he donating to the contraceptive pension fund?

[Marja]

Well I'm fairly sure I'm sterile... But I'm not about to play the part of the turkey-baster to test that.

[Yarrow]

if you reject parenting FT, is your alternative not breeding at all?

[birthday pony]

So, society will continue because some people will breed no matter what. Now I have another question:
Is it important that society continues to exist?

[Francois Tremblay]

I refuse to answer that question because it is an irrational question in this context. Beliefs about breeding or non-breeding has no influence on whether "society continues to exist," and I believe you are simply planning to use whatever I answer as an argument. If I say that I personally wish society to continue to exist, you will claim that I am contradicting myself. If I say that I do not wish society to continue to exist, you will call me insane and anti-social.

[birthday pony]

I refuse to answer that question because it is an irrational question in this context. Beliefs about breeding or non-breeding has no influence on whether "society continues to exist," and I believe you are simply planning to use whatever I answer as an argument. If I say that I personally wish society to continue to exist, you will claim that I am contradicting myself. If I say that I do not wish society to continue to exist, you will call me insane and anti-social.

I think it is completely relevant to our discussion. You have claimed that there is no positive reason to breed, yet that the only way society will continue is by a few people who continue to breed. So, if you think it is important that society exist then I could give you a positive reason for breeding, if not then I'd like to further investigate your stance in order to understand what you are saying. Moreover, it is relevant in that multiple people have asked for you to state an alternative to breeding to which you have said breeding will never be completely gone.

The question is not irrational, in fact, it logically follows what we've been discussing. You say that breeding is bad. I say that it is necessary for existence. You say that breeding will always continue no matter what. So, I am wondering whether or not you think this is a good thing. I have no way of knowing whether or not you think a minority of people breeding is good or bad without knowing whether or not you think the continuation of society is good or bad.

If you offered an alternative to breeding that we haven't thought of that would be another line of discussion. As you can see, the question isn't irrational and certainly leads to further discussion of the same topic. You don't have to answer, but understand, I am willing to continue the discussion because I am still interested in it.

[Yarrow]

hear hear.

perhaps it's a case of who's breeding; certainly the idea of a parenting license has its' merits.

perhaps it's a situation that could be improved through technology- in fact scrap that; the issue is with the familial setup.