caliskunk1

I belive this would be the right forum for this, just kind of a shout out to all interested. not much content yet, so feel free th check out www.jesusradicals.org as well.

I encourage discusson in christian anarchism, anarcho-sydicalism, whatever. This group is NOT specifically pacifist, vegan, or str8edge (God knows i'm none of those!) So all are welcome.

http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/anarchrist

In Solidarity
BlackStar (caliskunk1)

__________________
-(A)- INSERT ANARCHIST CLICHE HERE -(A)-

WNB

Sounds good. If I was Christian, I would deffinatly say this sounds cool. Until...


I have some problems with that statement. First off, I thought you said you didn't lord it over others. Saying that you've been specially selected by god really sounds like you're lording over others. Second, I don't see how things such as money, capitalism, military and government are related to problems in the church, or how they are false idols.

In conclusion...religious reform is a good idea. Blending it with anarchy is not. Organized religion is the polar opposite of anarchy, and mixing the two is as illogical as mixing aetheism and creationism. In fact, I don't think these things are idols at all; rather they simply corrupt people. Just like religion.

__________________
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

caliskunk1

I'm no supporter of organized religion. the organized part is unneeded. The original christian churches were de-centralized and diverse. This ended (as far i know, i may be wrong) when the sect known as Catholic teamed up with the roman government, ad went about systemacally persecuting and arresting members of other sects, and destroying almost all of their texts and documents. the only one i know that survived are the texts of the Gnostic sect, which were hidden away in a cave by some smart members.

Refering to false idols, The state is obvious. Jesus Himself said something along the lines of "Kings and govenors walk amoung you, do not let them" as well as other similar quotes, of with i'll show in another post after i look them up. Money is the same. In UK poll i remember (in the Guardian, methinks) it says 60% of britons put the aquisition of wealth over their faith. In this consumer culture, peole are judged by what they own first and formost. in an emergency, would you rather your kid seeked help from a well-dressed tobacco exec or a punk anarchist squatter?

I don't think it's lording over others, either. We force no one to believe or conform to what we say. if you don't like it, u don't gotta follow it. i do agree it seems kinda elitest. i would not have that statement there, but i don't run the site.

caliskunk1

These are all very good

Deconstructing Romans 13: Verse 1-2
http://www.jesusradicals.com/main/essays/Romans13.htm

Anarchism is the only political option for Christians
by Andrew Baker
http://www.jesusradicals.com/main/essays/anarchism.html

Why is the Cry for a Ruler Rejection of God? Commentary on 1 Samuel 8
by Andrew Baker
Scripture- http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/...+8&version=NIV
Essay- http://www.jesusradicals.com/main/essays/rejection.html

Biblical Anarchism
by Stephen W. Carson
http://www.jesusradicals.com/main/essays/biblical.html

Mr.Mojorisin

Anarchism will never work, will never be supported by the people and is turning into more of a fad than a political ideology.

__________________
"There are things known and there are things unknown, and in between are the doors." Jim Morrison

"I believe in the near future, the government will use anti-drug hysteria to set up a police state" author William S. Burroughs, 1947.

S2

its just so... so... disorganized

Breed

The history of the 20th century is stained with the blood of the failure of all of the far-left ideologies. Anarchism, socialism, communism - you name it, it failed, and it failed spectacularly. Any variation on any of them will continue to fail, for one reason: they are all completely, and utterly, systemically flawed.

I am an ex-Marxist, and I admit that freely. I am a conservative now, and I think that gives me a better perspective on what works politically and what doesn't. Anarchism doesn't work. It never has (this is a fact - even the very earliest societies always had some kind of organised social structure and authority - i.e., a state), it doesn't (there are no anarchist societies outside of small, often very poor, communes which rely on outside aid), and it never will (for the same reasons it hasn't and doesn't).

Read "The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek. And consider for a moment that the far-left, and anarchism included, has failed spectacularly. It is an unworkable ideology, in theory and in practicality.

The only way that the entirity of society can have a chance of peace, prosperity and freedom is through capitalism, the free-market, representative democracy and a just, well-enforced rule of law.

- Breed.

EDIT:

I just noticed your signature, and I had to laugh. I urge you to copy this and look at it in a couple of years or so. I wish I had kept half the quotations I loved as a Marxist, as they would just send me into gales of laughter right now. On a more serious note, class conflict doesn't exist naturally: the only reason class conflict does exists is because people like you stir it up, by convincing the less intelligent and educated that those who are more or less sucessful are their enemies, rather than their fellow members of society who wish for peace, prosperity and freedom just as much as they do.

__________________
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

- John Stuart Mill

Mr.Mojorisin

Name an instance where a communist government was allowed to freely rule the people without Western economic and militant pressure. Socialism has failed? Socialism is far-left? What a joke. Socialism is moderate leftist and socialism has not failed, as Canada is surviving. And why do you not mention the far right? None have caused more suffering and destruction than the right.

Breed

For a start, Mr M., you're confusing me. Socialism is not a single ideology. It is a group of ideologies that includes communism, anarchism, at the most extreme, and Fabianism and social democracy closer towards the centre. However, I will make the case that socialism has failed entirely.

This is a pointless question, as you clearly don't have a clue what communism is. "Communist government" is in and of itself a contradiction, if you mean communism in the traditional Marxist sense. If you meant 'Stalinist/Castroist/Maoist government' (i.e., the only type of far-left socialism that has ever held government) the reason that pressure was applied to these states was because of horriffic human rights abuses, tanking economies, and aggression towards internal and external enemies.

Yes. Socialism has failed spectacularly where anarchism and communism are concerned. This is hardly up for debate.

As for Social Democracy and its variants, I urge you to point out a single country where social democracy is practiced - i.e., an advanced welfare state (Canada does not have an advanced welfare states in the social democratic sense - in fact, several European countries are worse), including socialised medicine free at the point of delivery, with an economy which suffers/benefits (your POV) from high government intervention, AND WHICH IS ACTUALLY SUCCESSFUL. The only countries which have anything like social democracy - i.e., Scandinavian countries, and perhaps Germany - suffer from enormous debt, stagnant and/or shrinking economies, high inflation and interest rates, and very often, accompanying it, high crime rates. Countries which pursue a capitalist, free-market agenda are much more successful, as are the parties who support these ideas.

Canada can hardly be called social democratic. It only appears so in comparison with the much-more-capitalist US. Furthermore, I'd hardly call its immense problem holding on to its own professional class (who prefer the lower taxes in the US) a stunning advertisement for its position on the capitalist/socialist scale.

You confuse socialism and social democracy. The latter is a variant of the former. However, the latter is not far-left, as are most other variants of the former.

This is factually wrong. The amount of deaths caused by Mao in China - in his so-called Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution - not even counting similar genocides/famines in the former USSR, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam etc., dwarf the amount killed by Hitler or Mussolini. You only feel comfortable making a statement like that because it is so much more politically correct to denounce Nazism and still love Communism - which both are just as evil as each other. The problem is that our society has still not let go of its obsession with Marxism/Communism and the far left, as it has Nazism. This is largely due to the influence of the popular media and institutions of higher education.

- Breed.

Dalamar49

Whoa people. Not all forms of anarchy are socialist/communistic.

Capito-anarchism/anarcho-capitalism and individual anarchism are two forms of Libertarian anarchism.

Both right and left ideologies have f'ed up the world. The leftists want to take your hard earned paycheck to pay for their government welfare system while the rightists (conservatives) want your paycheck to pay for their fascist government policies (like the drugwar, censorship, statefunded relgion, war.)

Its time we shed both of these antiquated ideaologies. Society doesn't own you. You own yourself!!! Keep your government off my paycheck, pot, pistol and penis. I'll do what I like.

(some Libertarian macho-flash for you)