Philologos wrote:
RedHanrahan wrote:
it relies on the natural tendency of humans to work co-operatively and form into self regulating social units
Texts as old as the Tao Te Ching support my ongoing belief that anarchistic social organisation promotes humans pursuit of achieving their best.
It is interesting that the only rational and sustainable models for 'anarchy' are basically consistent with any other collectivist system [the most obvious being communism] and this leads me to believe that in order to nudge my society along on the evolutionary path and return to a more anarchistic society I must in the immediate future [probably for my entire life] accept the idea of state and being ruled and, using the democratic procces' choose the more 'socialistic' options which moderate the amassing of wealth and power by a minority in the hope that it will nurture my society in the skills and attitudes requisite for an anarchistic ideal. As my grandfather used to say - 'there for the greater good go I' - it is not ultimately all about me but rather it is [/i]all about we
That "anarchistic social organisation promotes humans pursuit of achieving their best" I tend to agree. The problem comes with the alleged "natural tendency of humans to work co-operatively and form into self regulating social units" A world of experience shows that ONLY applies up to a threshold of technology and community size. After that the Organizers and Powervolk institute various power structures.
Further - going through the socialist models is a bad choice. Those involve heavy uniformitarian socialization, and they will not yield to anarchy. Like a barbed spear point, the flow goes only one way.
I totally agree, this is the reason I hold anarchism to be an evolutionary doctrine and not a political agenda, one only needs to look through this thread to see reasons for desiring centralised power structures to protect us from gun toting loonies with agendas, even if this means the loss of control over ones social unit and destiny.
Anarchism as modeled by it's initial visionaries was not concieved for modern industrial societies to change to as they are already way too off balance and ruled by technocratic elites with industrialised methods of control [media, military, ecconomic]. I consider the likelihood of a workable and stable anarchistic society manifesting now at zero, however given the inevitable collapse of modern industrial societies along with the planets ecosystems at some point further down the road, keeping the ideas and skill base nescessary for a self governing decentralised society alive is essential if we wish any fruitfull human societies to survive, we got this far on co-operation more than competition and we will only survive this 'age of Kali' through it's manifestation.
I quite agree with you on the socialism thing too, again a conundrum, however if we wish to shift the course of modern societies off the path to anhilation or in the very least soften the impact of inevitable collapse then some form of democratic socialism is the best of a bad lot.
Personally I am a happy luddite and comfortable with brushing aside the whole industrial/militarist/capitalist paradigm and living in a much more localised and pastoral manner. Until then I will continue to model anarchistic behaviours and feed the old brain with constant new inputs,
peace j
_________________
Just because we can does not mean we should.
What vision is left? And is anyone asking?
Have a great day!
29 Jul 2011, 7:41 am
