Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

when will there be an anarchist society in England

when peoples hearts and minds reach a point where they accept the idea as being possible and indeed the next natural progression. This is where those proposing violence in over throwing the state go so badly wrong.
 
Barking_Mad said:
when peoples hearts and minds reach a point where they accept the idea as being possible and indeed the next natural progression. This is where those proposing violence in over throwing the state go so badly wrong.
Click to expand...

It's more the fact that those with the current vested interest in maintaining the current setup wouldn't allow such a change without a very big fight.
 
You can see this from France in '68. The powers that be will bollock on about maintaining order and their reluctant use of force etc etc, but ultimately they will send the tanks in to crush their own citizens rather than relinquish power, and this applies to every state, everywhere.
 
Shevek said:
the way I see it anarchism is just liberalism pushed a little further. My partner is a Liberal Democrat. The way I see an anarchist society in England is sort of like England with a Liberal Democrat government lead by Simon Hughes only pushed a little bit further so the state disolved or became an irrelevance like the monarchy. I think we need a federal system, organised from the bottom up. I think if there was an anarchist society in England there would be three institutions that would be important:- 1) the generalitat or assembly made up of recall-able delegates 2) the ecumene or sum total of human knowledge curated by anthropologists 3) Maquiladas or manufacturies constructing the technologies and products that we dream up.
Click to expand...
"Simon Hughes in charge" is your vision of an anarchist society!!! :eek:
 
Fruitloop said:
You can see this from France in '68. The powers that be will bollock on about maintaining order and their reluctant use of force etc etc, but ultimately they will send the tanks in to crush their own citizens rather than relinquish power
Click to expand...

On another thread I theorised that they would go so far as to nuke the whole planet rather than surrender their power and wealth.
 
poster342002 said:
On another thread I theorised that they would go so far as to nuke the whole planet rather than surrender their power and wealth.
Click to expand...

You did and other people, including myself, argued that it wouldn't be in their class interest to do that. Send in tanks, imprison their opponents without trial, torture them, kill them even, yes. But not annihilate themselves in a global nuclear war.
 
soulman said:
You did and other people, including myself, argued that it wouldn't be in their class interest to do that. Send in tanks, imprison their opponents without trial, torture them, kill them even, yes. But not annihilate themselves in a global nuclear war.
Click to expand...

True. Besides, those who work hand in glove with capital know that it isn't necessary to adopt a "scorched earth" policy, it's enough merely to very visibly make an example of selected groups/locations pour encourager les autres.
Fear cripples people's souls while still leaving them able to produce and consume.
 
Shevek said:
the way I see it anarchism is just liberalism pushed a little further. My partner is a Liberal Democrat. The way I see an anarchist society in England is sort of like England with a Liberal Democrat government lead by Simon Hughes only pushed a little bit further so the state disolved or became an irrelevance like the monarchy. I think we need a federal system, organised from the bottom up. I think if there was an anarchist society in England there would be three institutions that would be important:- 1) the generalitat or assembly made up of recall-able delegates 2) the ecumene or sum total of human knowledge curated by anthropologists 3) Maquiladas or manufacturies constructing the technologies and products that we dream up.
Click to expand...

What you're proposing isn't an anarchist society per se, but rather radically decentralised form of governance based around local needs and political issues. Your proposed structures would still, by their nature, constitute a state, or perhaps a para-state apparatus.
 
ViolentPanda said:
True. Besides, those who work hand in glove with capital know that it isn't necessary to adopt a "scorched earth" policy, it's enough merely to very visibly make an example of selected groups/locations pour encourager les autres.
Fear cripples people's souls while still leaving them able to produce and consume.
Click to expand...

Exactly, fear of the act can be as powerful as the act, or non-act.
 
soulman said:
Exactly, fear of the act can be as powerful as the act, or non-act.
Click to expand...

So all they'd have to do is nuke one or two cities and threaten to do the rest unless everyoen backed down.

The ruling class is capable of it, I'm sure. You're dealing with a class that has umpteen centuries of belief in it's "right to rule" at any and all cost ingrained into it's psyche. They'll stoop to anything to maintain that power.
 
poster342002 said:
So all they'd have to do is nuke one or two cities and threaten to do the rest unless everyoen backed down.

The ruling class is capable of it, I'm sure. You're dealing with a class that has umteen centuries of belief in it's "right to rule" at any and all cost ingrained into it's psyche. They'll stoop to anything to maintain that power.
Click to expand...

If you're looking to inspire fear, then a nuke is actually the wrong weapon to use, because it "sterilises". Far better, if you're looking to instill fear, to use conventional weapons that injure, maim and mangle as well as kill.
 
I think that the connection between religious dissenters and anarchists is heavily ignored by modern anarchists. I may be biased because it was my religious upbringing that brought me to anarchism. However, those that dismiss the historical link would be advised to read Luther Blissett's Q, not just one of the finest novels ever written in its own right, but also a fine anarchist text.

Re: the OP. Probably not. Anarchists, for now, are not the vanguard of the revolution, we are the perennial opposition. We exist solely to point out that the emperor has no clothes and to loudly question everything. Sow discontent, expose lies, suggest alternatives, live well and honestly, and always appear to be happier and more at ease than those who would chain you to a desk.
 
bluestreak said:
I think that the connection between religious dissenters and anarchists is heavily ignored by modern anarchists. I may be biased because it was my religious upbringing that brought me to anarchism. However, those that dismiss the historical link would be advised to read Luther Blissett's Q, not just one of the finest novels ever written in its own right, but also a fine anarchist text.
Click to expand...

Have you read E P Thompson's "Making of the English Working Class"? Goes into loads of detail (sometimes too much IMO!) about the links between religous dissent and early socialism.
 
JHE said:
JERUSALEM

AND did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountains green?
And was the holy Lamb of God
On England's pleasant pastures seen?

And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic Mills?

Bring me my bow of burning gold!
Bring me my arrows of desire!
Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!

I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England's green and pleasant land. ​

I quite like the poem/song, though it's weird religious bollocks. It's a patriotic revolutionary hymn.

The nature of the 'Jerusalem' to be built in 'England's green and pleasant land' is open to widely differing interpretations. Tories like the song. You think it's Anarchist.

I'd have to ask a Tory whether there is really any reason to think Blake's 'Jerusalem' is Toryland. Similarly, I ask you: Is there any reason to think Blake's 'Jerusalem' is Anarchy.

I think we can take 'Jerusalem' to represent a just society. Is there any reason to think that means a stateless society?
Click to expand...

Sounds a bit like Wayne John Sturgeons: Albion Awake.
Bit dodgy!!!!!:hmm::rolleyes:
 
Blagsta said:
Have you read E P Thompson's "Making of the English Working Class"? Goes into loads of detail (sometimes too much IMO!) about the links between religous dissent and early socialism.
Click to expand...
The very young (about 12 i'd guess) great granddaughter of the last Muggletonian was at the re-enactment of the Fifth Monarchist/Venner's Rising yesterday, holding a pike and screaming heads on pikes and charging St Pauls :cool:
 
I suppose the hanging, drawing & quartering was for the high treason but the triple halberd murder does mark him down as a wrong'un. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ATOMIC SUPLEX
You Gov poll says if there was an election tomorrow Reform would win.
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
282
Views
6K
chilango
chilango
O
Fabian Society - Conspiracy or Truth?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
191
Views
3K
Aladdin
Aladdin
danny la rouge
  • Poll Poll
When will Charlie’s reign end? (Tasteless speculation).
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
3K
brogdale
brogdale
starfish2000
I think the Bank of England Inflation calculator is being doctored.
2
Replies
40
Views
1K
ska invita
ska invita
U
In the event of war, is there anybody in the UK who would make a good 'national leader'?
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
268
Views
6K
Jennaonthebeach
Jennaonthebeach
Back
Top Bottom