Most self-proclaimed anarchists

[African_Prince]

are not consistent anarchists, whether the issue is child-raising, sex, justifying paternalism in certain scenarios etc., almost all of us will eventually contradict ourselves.

[|Y|]

To err is to human.

[jack]

are not consistent anarchists, whether the issue is child-raising, sex, justifying paternalism in certain scenarios etc., almost all of us will eventually contradict ourselves.

1) I raise my children how I damn well please, as long as I'm not beating, molesting, or abusing them in some other way, that's my own damn business and I don't see what being an anarchist has to do with it.

2) How is somoene's personal feelings about sex dependent on their political ideology?

3) Care to expand on that?

[Saturnine]

I know I contradict myself. I usually call myself a Minarchist/anarchist. Meaning I'd much rather have a small government, but if the chance arose I'd shoot for an anarchist society.

I think this way, because I don't believe in revolution, but instead evolutionary change.

[jack]

I know I contradict myself. I usually call myself a Minarchist/anarchist. Meaning I'd much rather have a small government, but if the chance arose I'd shoot for an anarchist society.

I think this way, because I don't believe in revolution, but instead evolutionary change.

Good luck being insignifigant.

[Guest]

I have noticed this too, most anarchists have at least a few authoritarian, socially conservative views. However this is not surprising as socio-cultural and economic conditions determine or at least is the primary influence on how people think and no one not even anarchists are completely immune.

[Yarrow]

v true guest, also some situations require authority. also, what IS the official anarchist way to raise kids? I have a tendency to hurt and educate people who apply blanket criticisms and don't respond to debate.

[Jawn Disease]

We have to make do with the social scenarios we grew up in. They influence us more than we would care to imagine. The best you can do is try to be a better person and a more ideologically correct anarchist, but it takes time and dedication

[African_Prince]

1) I raise my children how I damn well please, as long as I'm not beating, molesting, or abusing them in some other way, that's my own damn business and I don't see what being an anarchist has to do with it.

Children are not objects that you're entitled to raise "as you please".

2) How is somoene's personal feelings about sex dependent on their political ideology?

What one finds sexually appealing or desirable has nothing to do with anarchism but a consistent anarchist cannot criticize porn on the basis of it being inherently exploitative towads women (as Noam Chomsky does, criticizing it on the basis that it's exploitative towards the workers in general is another matter), this implies that there is an objective 'sexual morality' and sex is "supposed" to mean the same thing for everyone. This stems from authoritarian values pushed by patriarchical religions and cultures intended to restrict and tame sexuality and control women. Or the pedophilia issue, as unsettling as an anarchist may find it, is there a consistent anarchist justification for not allowing children to have safe, consensual sex with whoever they want to? Would you prevent me from having consensual sex with whoever I wanted to? No, because you aren't the boss of me. So if children are our equals (and anarchists have to accept that they are), how do you justify authority over them? Many self-proclaimed anarchists have judgemental and prejudiced attitudes towards sexually promiscuous people or 'deviant' sexual behavior, this is authoritarian, anarchists should be the last people trying to control the lives of others or dictate that behavior that does not harm other people is 'wrong'. They don't have to have liberal attitudes about sex themselves to realize this, it would be just as wrong for the 'liberal' anarchists to criticize monogamy or to force people into behaving polygamously.

v true guest, also some situations require authority.

We can debate about whether or not this is true but it's not consistent with the anarchist stance, we'd be debating about the validity of anarchism itself. Anarchism doesn't mean "without *some* rulers or contrary to *some* authority", it means "without rulers/contrary to authority period". Any stateless commune that believe authority is sometimes necessary will eventually redevelop the state. The state only exists because some of even the most libertarian people believe that 'some situations require authority'. How can we know for sure which situations require authority? Chomsky would say that all authority has to justify itself but what if some people aren't convinced?

also, what IS the official anarchist way to raise kids?

To regard them as your equals. To treat them with the same dignity and respect that you would treat another adult. I think anarchist parenting should focus on positive reinforcement (ie. rewarding good behavior rather than punishing bad behavior). While punishment per se can not be justified, I think an anarchist parent could revoke certain privileges like television or desert simply because they paid for those things and they are luxuries children don't need. Spanking, sending children to their room, telling them to go stand in a corner, I don't think these things can be justified (spanking definitely can not be).

[jack]

1)you aren't the boss of me.

The basis of your anarchism.

Dude, you are seriously fucked that's all I have to say. You claim that thinking porn is exploitative to women is "authoritarian" and pretty much criticize anything that may be a negative thought about gangbanging children in the streets as "authoritarian".



[qupte]We can debate about whether or not this is true but it's not consistent with the anarchist stance, we'd be debating about the validity of anarchism itself. Anarchism doesn't mean "without *some* rulers or contrary to *some* authority", it means "without rulers/contrary to authority period". Any stateless commune that believe authority is sometimes necessary will eventually redevelop the state. The state only exists because some of even the most libertarian people believe that 'some situations require authority'. How can we know for sure which situations require authority? Chomsky would say that all authority has to justify itself but what if some people aren't convinced?

A kid runs into traffic and I pull him away, that's justified authority. "Is it that we are against all authority? Of course not, in the manner of boots, I grant authority to the bootblack" (paraphrasing)

To regard them as your equals. To treat them with the same dignity and respect that you would treat another adult. I think anarchist parenting should focus on positive reinforcement (ie. rewarding good behavior rather than punishing bad behavior). While punishment per se can not be justified, I think an anarchist parent could revoke certain privileges like television or desert simply because they paid for those things and they are luxuries children don't need. Spanking, sending children to their room, telling them to go stand in a corner, I don't think these things can be justified (spanking definitely can not be).

Lol, you've never been around too many kids I guess. You don't treat children as your equals because they are naieve and still need to learn alot about the world. I don't consider them my equals because they are just children, and if you can sit back, pop open a beer, and watch NASCAR and discuss your sex life with a 7 year old, then you can call them your equals.

I take it you're a kid.

[African_Prince]

A kid runs into traffic and I pull him away, that's justified authority.

Authority can only be considered just, it can't be proven just. Your view isn't any more valid than the child's, not from an objective standpoint. Besides, I wouldn't consider pulling a child away from oncoming traffic to be an act of authority. Feel free to pull me away from traffic if I'm absentmindedly putting myself in danger without realizing it.

"Is it that we are against all authority?

Anarchists are against all authority and hierarchy. If you're going to be selective with which authority you accept and which you reject, you can be pro-state and still call youself an "anarchist".

Lol, you've never been around too many kids I guess. You don't treat children as your equals because they are naieve and still need to learn alot about the world. I don't consider them my equals because they are just children, and if you can sit back, pop open a beer, and watch NASCAR and discuss your sex life with a 7 year old, then you can call them your equals.

'Equal' doesn't mean equally intelligent, equally mature, equally knowledgeable etc. It means equal in terms of moral value and worth and deserving of equal respect and consideration. Any morally consistent philosophy has to acknowledge all sentient beings as being equal in this regard.

'Equal' doesn't mean the same either, there are adults I wouldn't sit back, have a beer and talk about my sex life with either.

[Yarrow]

nothing can be proven just. 'just' is a value statement.

and i don't think all anarchists are against all authority. what about intellectual authority, gained through experience and wisdom? every time you take someones' advice you're recognising and accepting their authority. it's like we were saying about the difference between leaders and rulers.

regard them as your equals. To treat them with the same dignity and respect that you would treat another adult.

do you agree a teacher can treat pupils with dignity and respect, while still fulfilling their function?

[Francois Tremblay]

are not consistent anarchists, whether the issue is child-raising, sex, justifying paternalism in certain scenarios etc., almost all of us will eventually contradict ourselves.

Agreed! Except for me, as far as I know. If I hold to a hierarchy, no one has pointed it out to me yet.

[Yarrow]

if children are our equals (and anarchists have to accept that they are), how do you justify authority over them?

in what respect are children the equal of adults? EI, IQ, height, weight, earning power, wisdom, experience... i could go on but i won't. i think what you mean is they're equal in some kind of fuzzy, indefinable, not-actually-existent kind of way. obviously one child is equal to one adult in terms of living units, but then so are other animals, which raises another area in which anarchists are debatably inconsistent.

of course i don't aim to demean children, but i really can't understand what is meant here.

[Aeon135]

I know I contradict myself. I usually call myself a Minarchist/anarchist. Meaning I'd much rather have a small government, but if the chance arose I'd shoot for an anarchist society.

I think this way, because I don't believe in revolution, but instead evolutionary change.

something on minarchists, i think they are not related to anarchists, minarchists support the state to protect them, the gaurdian of there rights, they see it as neccesary, while anarchists view is opposite, in this sense they are polar opposites