In the Movement Towards Freedom From Oppression

i have found myself for the first time saying that i am an anarchist without the application of a smirk.  isn´t that what was previously required? a faint recognition of the "ridiculousness" of such radical thinking? the prerequisite nod of absurdity but "so what, i´ll do what i want (and does it matter anyway?).  that smirk has held me back for so long- the guard against the constraints of social judgment, the limits which we are told exist around (and for) us- all of the things which have only acted to reinforce oppression in my life. 

so what do you do/where do you go/who do you ask/OH horrible freedom...

it seems that fear of the unknown is the only actual limit.  fear of conceptualizing a world without leaders, a world without government, a world without heirarchical-oppressive structure...NO ONE TELLING YOU WHAT TO DO.  can we imagine?  or is it too terrifying?  was the existentialist correct?  that "we" can´t handle true freedom, because it will awaken us to the meaninglessness of our current lives?  the arbitrary, haphazard nature of life?

or are we stronger than that?

it is possible to recognize that there is meaning in this world outside of the systems that exist: the meaning that we choose to assign.  value is neither packaged nor delivered.  what we have been given may not be authentic.  truth lies in criticism, skepticism, conscientiousness.  and in a government system diametrically opposed to such necessities, we must deconstruct, abolish and open. 

liberalism is not sufficient. someone leads, others follow. this is a system of power-over, which is unecessary and oppressive.  state-socialism is not sufficient.  the government has control over societal distribution, which is control nonetheless and leaves room for corruption.

anarchism is sufficient.  it´s ideals recognize the need for a horizontal society, one absent of power-over, heirachry, and it´s counterpart oppression. it is a system based on communal support, local consensus, and peace.

in the movement towards freedom from oppression, i posit anarchy.

meeeese meeeese
31-35
13 Responses Mar 16, 2009

ah, the moment you realize that you can call yourself an anarchist without a smirk. mainstream media would have us all believe that anarchy only means rioting in the streets and dangerous gangs killing people for resources but that's simply not true. At least not completely.

The united states of america was built on dream's and beliefs of everyone together. that the only Single reason why it was brought to a democracy. Anarchism Is the most suited because of all the benefit's you have listed. Anarchism is possible. All you really need is the exact same kind. A huge amount of people That beileve in the same ideal's the same Want the Same Exact DREAM. Then it is possible. Anarchism could be posted into a "Ballet" Why? Because there is no law saying that we can not.If the people decide whats best for them then the constitution would fall and anarchy will be taken instead of the over powering constitution.

Describe Hippie( Fat,Over Weight,Beetle's music, it's all good bro type if bullshit? I'm sick and brutally tired. No to most of you. I am not a minor i am a legal adult in this OverPowered Country. What i said was true. What i feel i feel is right. Why should we live by their rules when we could live on our OWN Term's? Anarchism couldn't survive? I highly beg to differ.This country was built upon Belief's And a Dream Free of what Taxation FROM The BEGGINING From the KING AND FU*KING QUEEN!!With out the people and family's and Their soldier's believing THAT they couldl ive free and safely with structure of WHAT?? Tax?That's a load of ****.Look at every single fu*king item,Look AT Everything you own your possession's is all taxed. They LIED. In a Country of freedom and Right's.<br />
We have Right's THAT THEY FUKING GAVE US?THEY ARE NOT A FUKING GOD. THEY ARE NOT GOD. THEY CAN NOT AND WILL NOT TELL ME OR ANYONE ELSE WHAT WE CAN AND CAN NOT HAVE. THEY ARE A GOVERNMENT NOT THE FUKING RULER'S ARE A GOD DAMN DICTATOR. THEY SAY IT IS OUR GOD DAMN RESPONSIBILITY TO VOTE! VOTE FOR WHAT WHEN THE OBVIOUSLY DON'T TELL WHAT THERE REALLY FUKING DOING. HUH? SO THEY GIVE YOU BIT'S OF TINY LITTLE INFORMATION AND TELL YOU YES WHERE THE RIGHT IDEA GO AND VOTE FOR ME. THE HELL? NEVER HAS 1 SINGLE POLITICIAN EVER GAVE THE FULL INFORMATION OF WHAT THEY ARE EXACTLY PLANNING AND TRYING TO DO. (Excuse me for the cap's.)<br />
Then when they are elected they get overpaid because they voted it in for themselves. Well i say *** them. We are not getting paid for not doing ****. Look at them million's of dollar's, They are getting payed Million's of dollar's even when they are OUT OF OFFICE. They say they listen to the people. Do they fuking really listen to us? NO. They listen to see how the economy is going. "Oh hey look stocks are down we should "TRY" to fix this with an Error or here let's try the other FAULT. They only do what's good for them. Are they really doing what's good for us. We the people? We the people of what? The people of an over controlled government That DECIDES if we should be taxed and taxed for being taxed? Over priced on almost every single item? Food is Taxed?Water is Taxed? Police brutality is Happening all around you. You might not even realize it. It Is Every Where. They Say WE are wrong for wanting what is best what is probably best?You are only siding with them Because you believe that with out them you can not provide food and shelter and protection? No. That is a simple Excuse. Don't bullshit me. People are Scared of almost EVERYTHING in this country. When the United States of America is supposedly the best country in the world. Bullshit. Where invading other country's because they bombed us and we felt "Threatend?" That is a load of ****. We fuking Started it. WE STARTED IT.What about the environmental problems in america? What's happening with those? Hardly ANYTHING.The Value of the dollar is nothing anymore.People on welfare (Not just the mentally delayed) Because most can't work or there are no job's! IN THE NEXT 5 YEAR'S JOB'S WILL BE GETTING HARDER TO COME BY EVERY SINGLE DAY. There's all kind's of bogus Bullshit on the new's now and day's. People getting all hyped up about nothing. "Someone ran over my cat, let's put them on the new's and arrest them" THE HELL? It could have been an accident. They also say fair trial by jury. Fair Trial By Jury?Most people in jury are not even fair.Once they hear the side that they think is Right ( the bad side) They automatically say guilty. That **** IS WRONG. "In order to live free and happy you must sacrifice boredom? Boredom of what? Not being able to do what we actually and truly want to do? Must abide by all law's and regulation's? Screw up 3time's go to jail for life? NO.Breast Cancer? You can get the same god damn treatment out side of the u.s. We all know that.<br />
<br />
<br />
"enter: faith, love, compassion, empathy, kindness, graciousness, understanding, hope..."<br />
<br />
Faith: Into the government that lies and taxes every single thing or matrial item that you need? No thanks.<br />
<br />
Love: In a country where everyone Has to much pride and moral's that they try to achieve but don't? So they go for the best they can? NO. <br />
<br />
Compassion: You speak of compassion. But compassion for what? The government? Out country? the soldier's of the u.s.a are dieing for a lost cause. You know it and i know it.<br />
<br />
Empathy: Don't get me started.<br />
<br />
<br />
Kindess: To Who? Why should i be kind. Why should you be kind? Because it is respect? Get over yourself.<br />
<br />
<br />
Graciouseness : Of what overly rich people becomnig snob's? No thanks. I'm not oprah.<br />
<br />
<br />
Understanding : Are you fuking joking me? Understand what i am telling you and everyone else. Try to understand that.<br />
<br />
Hope : Hope for the government to do what they actually say what they will do? Oh i would hope they do. Oh look.. THEY HAVEN'T NOR DO I BELIEVE THEY EVER WILL.

"Can a "society" of 12 hippies live in total harmony rasing their own food and making their own clothes? Yes. Would THAT commune ever develop the means to diagnois breast cancer (via biopsy) and treat it with chemotherapy? Never.<br />
<br />
That would be the trade off."<br />
<br />
I say: There wouldn't be so much cancer in that society because of the lifestyle. The people in this group might also be familliar with plant-based and Eastern medicine, some of which is more for prevention than cures. So they're like, doubly protected. <br />
<br />
NGIH, you make a good point about the commune model not working on a larger scale, but let's flip it for a sec. Why does it have to be a USA-sized commune at all? I agree with you and think several small groups would function better.<br />
<br />
And you mention our instincts kicking back in and causing problems, but let me make a few points here: The modern world already has fighting and war, so it's not like that system is working, the problems just aren't on this side of the ocean. And these anarchists argue that this society dumbs down and opresses the citizens. Our commune model, on the other hand, has peace as a central idea. I'm not saying it wouldn't be a rocky road but I think people would learn: If someone disturbed the peace, it would directly effect everyone and would come back to bite him/her. That's a pretty good way of making people want to do the right things.<br />
<br />
Then you say you'd be bored, but that's just false. Sitting around all day wouldn't happen, friend, not if you're growing your own food and making your own clothes like you said. And don't forget hanging out with friends and .... doing what you like! Anything can inspire you. <br />
"In order to live free and happily, you must sacrifice boredom. It is not always an easy sacrifice," ~Richard Bach. <br />
<br />
Answer me back please! :)

i´m not sure about all the monkey business...<br />
<br />
all anarchists are socialists, but not all anarchists are socialists. there is an inherent egalitarianism etched in the ideologies of both, but the difference lies in the conceptualization of a governing apparatus.<br />
state socialism conceives of a state which decides on and distributes societal goods, a source of power and as i said before, a potential source of oppression. as an example we must look to the South, to countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, El Salvador and others. These countries have adopted state sponsored socialism as a means to assuage the ranks of the poor, and have done so to tremendous benefit. as we have seen in corporate media coverage, many of the upper classes of those countries have cried foul, claiming that the gov´t has done them wrong. in reality, they are less privelaged becasue society is becoming less unbalanced due to gov´t intervention. <br />
<br />
-socialism is thus "on the road" to anarchism. <br />
<br />
However, be/c chavez has had such success as of late, he ran for (and won) legislation allowing him to be president for unlimited terms, granted he gets elected to those terms. <br />
<br />
-this is where anarchism diverges. <br />
<br />
any system of power allows for abuse. in anarchy, there is no system of power over. everyone decides together, yes, but in a consensus based model, not a top-down heirarchical scheme. <br />
<br />
also, anarchy and education, science, food, etc, are not mutually exclusive. why would they be? be/c a society has no system of punishment? <br />
<br />
enter: faith, love, compassion, empathy, kindness, graciousness, understanding, hope...

Off-topic but, yes Krypton, you are definitely an Alpha Female.<br />
<br />
And off-off-topic....I've bene watching Big Love on HBO (a show about Mormonism and plural marriage) and it is fascinating to see how tribal and in some respects how natural it seems. Before you ***** me of my Feminist card, I didn't say plural marriage and sister-wives was a "good" thing (though it doesn't necessarily have to be "bad"), I'm just saying that the idea of an alpha male having a small group of mating partners seems not much different than how silverback gorrillas structure their society.<br />
<br />
Whether or not the gorillas have religious justifications for having multiple "wives" remains unknown.<br />
<br />
I wish we could teach one of them sign language so we could communicate with them like we have with one of the chimps.

I may have to start telling my friends to "fetch me water", just to see if they will do it. I am an alpha? haha <br />
On a serious note... The anarchy that seems to be envisioned here has a social structure that sounds more like socialism. Everyone decides together and everyone works together. When I think of anarchy I see it more as having no society guidelines and no punishments for stepping out of the guidelines. We have societies in order to have more stuff. Stuff like education, science, and food during famine. I find it interesting that a side effect is that the weak are more protected and people have a desire to include people that would not always have a chance in more primitive settings. Society can be oppressive, but it has some wonderful unexpected benefits.

"Fear of conceptualizing a world without leaders, a world without government, a world without heirarchical-oppressive structure...NO ONE TELLING YOU WHAT TO DO. Can we imagine?"<br />
<br />
Based on your description of anarky...this state is (for the most part) a logical impossibility.<br />
<br />
Someone will ALWAYS be telling you what to do. <br />
<br />
A word without heirarchical structure really isn't possible. Even pre-historic humans lived in a heirarchical/herd structure! Not because commercials convinced them it was a good idea, but because it was necessary for survival.<br />
<br />
The problems in Africa can be blamed on many things, but the end result is the same: without a strong government structure imposing order a different heirarchical order arises naturally all on its own to secure scarce resources and get all the chicks. The fact that these tribes form naturally says to me that it is not a unnatural state.<br />
<br />
The idea that humans can just sort of all live in blissed out communes is definitely workable....in extremely small groups and in extremely contrived situations.<br />
<br />
And we cannot pretend that there wouldn't be trade-offs for a society without any structure. Can a "society" of 12 hippies live in total harmony rasing their own food and making their own clothes? Yes. Would THAT commune ever develop the means to diagnois breast cancer (via biopsy) and treat it with chemotherapy? Never.<br />
<br />
That would be the trade off.<br />
<br />
And, again, it would be impossible to apply the hippie/commune model on a national scale. Does it work resonably well on a very small scale in stable socities with abundent natural resources? Yes. Would it work on a nation of, say, 150 million with very scarce natural resources (like water, grazing land, etc)? <br />
<br />
Personally, I don't think so. The survival instincts we humans have developed over million of years would automatically kick in and we would group into tribes oriented around a powerful alpha leader...and we would war with other tribes to secure our portion of the scarce natural resources necessary to our tribes survival.<br />
<br />
I non-heirarchical world might be possible, but it could only arise when there was "enough" stuff for everyone and there was no need to fight over it....and even then the primitive instinct to fight/achieve status might still cause conflicts!<br />
<br />
Wouldn't we all be bored just sitting around all day with every need met? Isn't that why some millionaire rock stars meltdown and create drama even though it seems they should be happy because they already have everything?

NGIH, so i gather you think life in nature would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short?" <br />
so did Hobbes in the 17th century. that excerpt was taken from the leviathan, his monstrous reference to the monarchy and general system of control, as a justification for the founding of "the state," via social contract. he was theorizing the "moment" when "society" began, assuming that without oppressive control, humans were absurdly savage creatures (as was the impression of Europeans when they landed in "america" and witnessed all those savage "indians" running about half naked and CRAAAAAZY!!!), totally incapable of governing themselves as they actually had been in agrarian collectives for thousands of years. <br />
<br />
the problem Hobbes had a few hundred years ago, as well as the current political theory system has today, is that it´s vision has been constricted, narrowed, defined.<br />
<br />
as audre lorde said, "you cannot dismantle the master´s house using the master´s tools." <br />
<br />
part of the challenge of formulating a peaceful society is having enough love of humankind to be confident in its potential. <br />
<br />
these so called failed states you speak in africa are suffering on a grande scale due to the dire consequences of globalized capitalism. if they are violent, i guarantee it is not because of any "system of anarchy" as you suggest, rather it is because they don´t have adequate food, medical care, education or hope. <br />
<br />
if anything, such situations should be evidence that a key component of the current system is oppression. <br />
<br />
this is not just. this is not acceptable.

Freedom always sounds great on paper, doesn't it?<br />
<br />
"I don't want ANYONE to EVER tell me what to do! I want to live in a world without any rulers!"<br />
<br />
Well, at the moment I have a filling in my tooth that needs refilling. Hate to say it but without a little bit of "oppressive" structure there would be no one building the dental tools necessary to fix my tooth nor would there really be any kind of "school" where people could learn dentistry.<br />
<br />
Anarchy (from my humble perspective) seems like something that only appeals to people who haven't actually lived in it.<br />
<br />
There are failed States in Africa where it is just like Lord of the Files/Return to Nature anarky...and they don't seem to be relishing their "freedom" that much. It's just rape, murder and starvation (kinda of exactly like how life is in the wild...well, maybe minus the rape since that is kind of a subjective term that might not apply to silverbakc gorrilas)<br />
<br />
In fact, one could make the arguement that there is no freedom in anarky at all. Even if we abolished every form of government on the planet...we'd still be taking orders from the biggest alpha males. We'd be running to fetch them fresh water or else get bonked on the head by their clubs.<br />
<br />
So true freedom on a national scale is illusionary. True, a single individual can run off into the woods and be totally free...but it could never happen on a truly continent-wide scale because we'd just revert back to our caveman-ways with the biggest and strongest ruling over the weaker.

"we" can't handle true freedom, not on a constant basis. We like the predictability of having food on our plates and water from our faucet. True anarchism would create a world devoid of all dependability and society. There are benefits to society that I am not willing to give up. Society creates specialization which in turn creates leisure time which then creates technology and art. I like what you said and the way you said it, I just need more of the grimy details of how it would work.

that´s interesting caroli, thanks for sharing. ít´s amazing how we´re taught from the earliest age to obey, accept, to want to appease and thus receive award. child rearing is supposed to ready a developing person to exist independently in the world. and we so often subconsciously teach via reinforcement of oppressive constructs, perpetuating the cycle again and again.

all i can say is ... ask a child. From the mouths of the young the words ring true. <br />
<br />
this may seem way out of left feild but im going to share it ok ... any way i was asked to look after some kids at a christening and we sat at the back of the church and one boy says to me " WOW who's the king and the Queen ? " <br />
I said well thats Jesus and mary and he says " Did they have a dragon ? ".