Advertisement
How do we bring down the gov ne ideas postem.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Unsu...
Re: Anarchy
Sat, March 13, 2004 - 6:35 PMhi you's GUYS!!!
here goes, gimme feedback!!
kill all politician
everyone stops paying taxes
everyone stops paying their visa bills
everyone stops paying rent or mortgage (become squatters)
blow up all credit record reporting and keeping offices
kill all accountants
kill all actuaries
kill all layers
oh...and kill all the fucking politicians
before the the killing begins : ) blow up police stations and communication towers and phone lines.
blow up TV towers
kill all scum sucking politicians
raid military installations remove all side arms and assault riffle and arm the citizens
kill the politicians (most of the ARE lawyers)
create as much chaos as possible(in chinese chaos has to meanings "confusion" and opportunity")
now this is just a rough quick list i've been think about since i was a teen, i'll think some more....
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Fri, November 10, 2006 - 1:55 PMall the politicians do for us is bicker and bitch over pointless subjects whilst billions are spent on bombs that will be used to kill innocents...BRING IT DOWN!!!
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Tue, April 6, 2004 - 11:55 PMLet it waste All "our tax dollars" money on a stupid unnessasary war. It'll bring down itself. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Sun, April 11, 2004 - 1:01 AMhow do you figure?
do you really feel there is any end to this empire's resources?
does the concept of fiscal payment have any plausible relevance anymore?
r...
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Mon, May 31, 2004 - 1:06 PMok, chaos is good.
i like the squatting and getting rid of credit card buildings, etc. arming the people from military bases could be useful in a limited way.
however, the "kill x, y, and z" has been tried - french revolution, china's cultural revolution, pol pot's cambodia, hitler's germany, and on and on. it has gotten rid of government exactly nowhere. so the identity-based killing stuff is all useless for creating anarchy. it just creates different kinds of governments, as bad as the ones we started with.
as for the "wait and see, wait for the resourcs to dry up" approach, this too has been tried with no anarchy as a result. a lot of people tried this in rome. what happened when it fell? a bunch of new governments run by warlords. no anarchy.
proposal: worldwide general strike in all industries.
this will make possible the seizure of all capital and weapons by the people and permanent elimination of government.
this will of course require a lot of organizing and effort to get to, but it's really the only way to get to anarchy. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Sun, July 4, 2004 - 1:11 AMClay = Karl
hey there Mr. Marx! wrong tribe!!!
love,
reuben... -
-
Re: Anarchy
Thu, September 30, 2004 - 3:54 PMOddly enough, I doubt anarchy will ever work without communism.
I believe the anarchist partylessness and communist unified party will be the Repub/Dem, or Yin/Yang split in our political future.
But they'd actually work together rather than just trying to politically destroy each other... er, I mean use each other in a sick twisted way to keep themselves in power.
Eventually, communism will die off and anarchy will reign free. But before then, communism may be the only way past our current sitch. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Thu, October 14, 2004 - 5:18 PMThat makes sense. yin/yang, extreme left/exreme right, communism/anarchism. For anarchy to begin/develop in this day and age, it has to start out as something with organization and people will realize that we need to government, then slowly, it will turn to anarchy and an overall better society. Of course, you have to take into account people rebelling against anarchy (it sounds kindof backwards, doesn't it?) but that will be many many years from now, so we don't really have to worry about it.
-
Re: Anarchy
Thu, October 14, 2004 - 5:18 PMThat makes sense. yin/yang, extreme left/exreme right, communism/anarchism. For anarchy to begin/develop in this day and age, it has to start out as something with organization and people will realize that we need to government, then slowly, it will turn to anarchy and an overall better society. Of course, you have to take into account people rebelling against anarchy (it sounds kindof backwards, doesn't it?) but that will be many many years from now, so we don't really have to worry about it. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Tue, October 19, 2004 - 9:37 AMIn small ways, we all have to rebel against this society, (Which, I'm assuming, is the reason for anarchy) like not getting credit cards, only working for just causes, not driving or buying gas, homeschooling our children, not shopping at corperations, thieving from them if you need to, tax evasion, white collar theft from the wealthy, simple acts of destruction. If all of the people who feel this way take action, they cannot stop us. violence has been proven ineffective. lets try compassionate anger
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Wed, November 3, 2004 - 8:46 PMUhh, Anarchists have tried colabration with the Communists before and got our heads handed to us. The greates example is the CNT in Spain.
The problem is the Communists want to give power initially to a elite group of rulers, Ie the dictatorship of the prolitariat. This of course leads to people not wanting to relinquis power. On the other hand Anachists beleive in going into immediate collectivesation via coops and affinity groups therby not creating a ruling class.
I don't trust a Communist anymore then I trust a Facist in fact I might even trust the goddamn facist first as I know exactly where the stand.
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Wed, November 3, 2004 - 8:37 PMBetter read up on your Kropotkin and Bukunin if you think that idea is purely Communist. A little Goldman might help too. :>)
-
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Wed, November 3, 2004 - 7:22 PMthat's an easy one - stop paying your taxes.
of course, you're going to get in trouble for it, but um, anarchists get in trouble sometimes. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Mon, November 15, 2004 - 3:39 PMAnarchy is not only about Violence, but much more.
Example: Microsoft Goes to countries without Child Labor Laws and exploits children and wastes cultures and tribes for Industrial Gain. Microsoft has admitted to this on more than a single occasion. Yes many practice with Violence and through Nihilism, but legally help me by starting Mass Emails and "Using the Masters tools to dismantle the Masters House." Simple Sticking it to the man. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Wed, December 15, 2004 - 8:31 PMTo me Anarchism is about peace not violence, Capatalism on the other hand is all about violence and worse... -
-
Re: Anarchy
Wed, March 2, 2005 - 2:20 PMYanni: yes! exactly! Kill everyone who doesnt agree with you!
Question, ever actually kill anyone?
Mike: ought to throw some Proudhoun in there too... when will folks understand anarchy does not always equal violence? -
-
Re: Anarchy
Fri, April 8, 2005 - 2:43 PMI have a poem for ya guys about standardized testing:
Sick and tired of being a pawn
in the stupid school system.
my half-assed lazy writing
always comes back as "advanced"
yet they still treat me like a child.
as if we weren't essential to their entire fucking operation...
they have no respect for the ones that feed them.
now they show everyone what we score on their tests.
they call it "incentive"
I call it bribery.
Bastards with red pens
overseeing our lives
no respect, just neglect,
feeding us LIES.
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Thu, June 16, 2005 - 11:56 PMok...this is how....we all even those of us who have no interest in politics claim to be liberals, which by definition we all are because liberal means open minded, and we convince all the liberals to leave for canada, and within 5-10 years of all republican conservative action, we will have a rich and poor society...no middle, and it will destroy itself...no fundings, no one to buy, the rich industries would disappear, if the average american didnt have money the government would no longer prosper...then we come back, and demand change... better health care, and better benefits, on promise that we will work, like always, and help to bring the economy back up to where it was during the Clinton Presidency. -
-
Re: Anarchy
Sun, July 17, 2005 - 10:30 PMBy definition a "liberal" is one who supports the liberal state. This means the belief that a state is necessary, and the role of the state is to protect certain rights--primarily the rights to life, liberty, and property. In practice, the liberal state protects the right to property (the foundation of the capitalism) above all others.
-
-
Re: Anarchy
Sun, July 17, 2005 - 10:33 PMWe make the government--and more importantly, the capitalist way of organizing our economy--irrelevant.
We build alternative economies, an entire infrastructure of our own that produces and distributes stuff that we want and need without manipulating us or introducing new bosses. We learn to feed and clothe ourselves, as a global community. And we organize those workers who cannot yet join that economy. And we organize mutual aid societies for direct action groups, like semi-permanent local spokescouncils enabling different anarchist groups to communicate and coordinate.