Our Political Positions

Looking at that graph makes me go "ewwwww"

societys will develop after communism, just not in the ways we know of.

What, the prescience of Marx's historical materialist model isn't absolute, you say?

Historical materialism is garbage as a theory and garbage as a predictive model. Works quasi-great in retrospect, doesn't work at all otherwise.

If there is a way to go about organizing human civilization that transcends his model entirely (and in fact expected ideologically) then it serves as only further evidence that his model is complete shit in the first place.

LABOR is not the defining trait of a man, nor of mankind. Labor is an infinitely diverse means to an infinitely diverse end. We are not united in it because we don't perform the same labor, we don't get the same results, we don't expect the same results, and we don't WANT the same results. Organizing your society on the principle that man is defined by labor is like organizing your bakery on the principle that bread is defined by yeast.

Even if you don't feel labor is the defining trait of man, it is still a part of man. And it does have value.

I have taken part in experiments like this, having a group of people perform tasks as a group without a leader, the group always started well but soon fell behind other groups that had leaders, and in time leaders naturally emerged, although unlike the other groups our leaders were not officially leaders, they began to make decisions that did not reflect back on them and almost at once began making choices that benefited them personally at the expense of the others. It is my believe that the result would be the same if the system was put into public use because in the end no matter how you cut it there will always be kings even if we don’t call them that.

In the end the smart usually have power over the stupid, it seems to me that in the system you propose there would be a great feeling of powerlessness and with no clear leaders, nothing would ever be as it seems. Also, in a war leaders would have to arise to lead the nation concisely against the enemy and at that point the system you propose would die. Even after taking up a leader the shock of re-organisation from the unseen leaders to seen leaders would leave the nation horrifically unorganised and possibly with a great deal of political infighting, I don’t believe the nation in question would be able to fight off the capitalist nation effectively and as such would see the death of the political system you propose.

Cough Cough, Juche Ideal, Cough Cough.

Worker-Farmer-Intellectual

I said not in the way we know of, history will nolonger be the study of class struggle, maybe another struggle will emerge, maybe history will become the story of efforts to work for the greater good.

People can be very easily unifed because of there class.

:lol:

Whoops, double posted, how do I delete my second post?

There should be an "x" in the bottom right corner click that.

I can only see it if its the last post of the topic.

You can't delete shit after it's been replied to.

I can only see it if its the last post of the topic.[/quote:36tkjthn]
I deleted it for you.

I like how we have 5 posts concerning a double post.

What you just described is the reason why we don't advocate a change to anarchism over night.
If the state were to fall right now without the the development of anarchist ideals in the population, we wouldn't have anarchism, we'd have anarchy.

Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.97

Left, right? what? All I know is that Corporations are not all bad.

Lrn2civilliberty.

I feel like me and you are very similar. (I retook this a bit back when I wasn't awake for more then 48 hours straight and was almost exactly where you are. cept a bit more towards the middle.)

When I can celebrate my gay incestual poligamist marriage with multiple donkeys and celebrate by shooting up heroin and popping off a few rounds, I'll be contempt.