the anarchy stuff you wrote at the other group sounded more like communism than anarchism my friend... what's that crap of everybody cooperating helping each other down? you sissy... call yourself open minded but you strike at all the fake anarchists...

anarchy is like you said before the absence of government, of a RULER... the thing you claim anarchy to be is none other but that of no rulers because we're equals, and that of course is bullshit, we all have differences... can we live with them? of course, but what if i don't feel like living with YOUR differences...i can move or do something about it... without asking for anybody's permission to do so, and if i end up being crazy and wanting to kill you, well, only the strongest or more apt to this "dangerous" situation will survive... to sum it all up your kind of anarchy is idealist, not realistic

and what's with that you call us? anomist? did you make up that? cuz i sure as hell can't find it on the dictionary... i'm assuming a= without, nomist= what.. .laws? nominal stuff? what is it?

This item has been blocked and cannot be viewed. The user who posted this item has been blocked due to abuse of the hi5 Terms of Service.

This item has been blocked and cannot be viewed. The user who posted this item has been blocked due to abuse of the hi5 Terms of Service.

i hate all of you anarchists, people regularly mistake it as communism, but they r wrong, communism is much much more purer than you dirty anarchists, in school i have an underground party and we beat up anarchists or anyone who calls themselves one, fuck you all

glory to comunism!!!

i can only imagine how much fun you'll be to hang out with once you've left school, you fascist. grow up. read a different book. something with pictures in perhaps?

hemm, thank you man, try to remember what ur U.R.S.S did with authority and then talk abt anarchism, "purer" he said!
get a true ideology nstead of a sick utopia.

Communism has been proven time and time again not to work. The problem with communism is that it doesn't have a workering price system. The government creates set price above or bellow the market clearing price. If it's above then you get a lower demand by the consumer and a greater supply by the supplier, resulting in a surplus, which then results in the product being worth less than it was. If it's bellow then you get a greater demand by the consumer, but the suppliers are willing to supply less, resulting in shortages. If it's a food shortage then people starve. Basically communism fucks up the economy, read a book and educate yourself.

Unfortunately, anarchy doesn't really work either, because once we take down the government, what do we do then? Well, we creat a new government, and we model it after some past government, or sum such, basically the leaders of the anarchist movement end up taking power and we're right back where we started. Some idiot is telling us what to do and making us pay taxes. If only anarchy really did work. I would be a happy man! True freedom! none of that pussy free love and happiness shit, survival of the fittest, me and my gun.

Palachinov likes to rule with the Black Hand after using it to masterbate about communism all day, so he creates lies about beating up anarchsits with his "underground" party at school. SCARRRRRRYYYYYYY! Rather than crush the very school system that fucks him in the ass, he fantasizes about beating up those who oppose over-arching soci-economic, cultural, and ideological systems. The reason why is because communism is just that, another superstructure imposed with a fascist will to power filtered through Social Darwinism that distorts the idea of survival of the fittest--and with all over-arching systems, they tend toward violent homo-sentient activities. Totalitarian systems are inherently based on "homo-erotic negation" that is people who are enaged in it disguise their proclivities for male sensuality by beating the shit out of men like wrestlers and football players fondling and tackling each other in tights. They think that the brutality of their sport actually conceals their inner homoerotic selves.

Maybe Palachinov wants to be a great conquerer or leader some day. Then he will find out how many fascists and imperialists were actually closet homosexuals, most of whom have secret gang rape initiations to induct fellow communists, capitalists, fascists, and other imperialist idological systems.

Tim is actually misguided--or rather he has tightened his nuts and bolts to tight (sic...homo metaphors). Tim views anarchism through a very small lens, so small that it creates ideological tunnel vision. He can't see beyond replication of one system or displacement of one type for a previous type. In other words, he chains the future with the past or is prone to incest. TIm's conception of time is blinded by top-down political and historical narratives and he can't see anything different, much so that he filters everything through that lens without knowing it--a type of disconscious conformism if you will...aka...a transmitter for hegemony masquerading as an "free thinker."

Anarchism doesn't try to create "a new government," it is antithetical to "a new government" (notice the singular use of the term). It attempts to fracture a totality to create more local autonomy for a variety of socio-political systems based on tentative strategic alliances not over-throwing one system and consciously or unconsciously replicating of One System (a heterogeneity of systems/governments that are rooted in a local social base not a power base from some distant point on the horizon--rule from below not from the top by the invisible hand).

Second, Tim's deep analysis--I mean really deep like deep throat--of change and power is actually an establishment view meant to undermine change before it can take place. The reason why alternative movements have failed is not because, as the cliche goes, the more things change the more they stay the same, but because the socio-economic, cultural, and ideological power of these larger systems can recenter their power and desire and influence quicker than those systems that do not have much of a socio-economic or ideological base or cultural capital. Remember, being pushed to the "margins" doesn't actually mean that there is no power--the center would not be able to identify itself without the periphery.

Third- as mentioned above with my critque/rant about Palachinov, Tim believes that survival of the fittest is actually some violent means of exerting presence and power. This "social Darwinist" crap has never been empirically verified or qualitatively proven to be "true." Shooting someone and blasting them into the dustbin of history is not survival of the fittest. It is actually the opposite since it is inherently misanthropic. It misapplies and misinterprets Darwin's bio-evolution, part of which is that a species evolves as a survival unit in a web of environmental relations, not as an individual entity with a gun severing ties with others by shooting people.

Killing someone with a gun is not biological evolution--it is biological annihilation for the victim and the victimizer.