5 ms·

It may not have been a serious conversation. I've met a few "anarchists" in college, and the limit to what they can usually accomplish is a bit of graffiti. Th

by wisty 14y ago

It may not have been a serious conversation. I've met a few "anarchists" in college, and the limit to what they can usually accomplish is a bit of graffiti. They'd need leadership, training, and materials to actually accomplish anything. I'm sure you could find a few people here who talk about ways they could hack into banks, but they aren't bank robbers. If you came up with a great plan (designed by a bank security specialist), and egged them on, then you might be able to convince a few to join you.

jeremyarussell 14y ago
They'd need leadership, training, and materials to actually accomplish anything. I just find it ironic that self proclaimed anarchists require leadership to function. Not that I disagree, just, it's a bit funny is all.
- sp332 14y ago
  Being "lead" isn't the same as being bossed around. As long as the leader doesn't claim some authority over the other members, it can still be "anarchist" leadership.
- ceejayoz 14y ago
  When I was in college, our floor's resident anarchist ran for (and won) a seat on student council. We found it rather entertaining.
  - sp332 14y ago
    Wow, did he even try to justify it? Maybe he's destroying the system from the inside? http://abstrusegoose.com/456 http://abstrusegoose.com/456 :)
  - JonnieCache 14y ago
    This argument is fallacious. Would you expect conservatives in 1970s britain to avoid using gas, electricity, trains, the telephone and so on, because they were publicly owned? Do you expect socialists in modern america not to ever use commercial businesses?
    - ceejayoz 14y ago
      Avoid using? No. Avoid running for office on a "I'd like to run the nationalized train system once I get elected" platform? Yes.
      - JonnieCache 14y ago
        Surely the anarchist would have dismantled the power structure and put some kind of heterarchical system in its place, assuming he had the power to do so. If he was just planning to sit in his special chair and laugh it up, then yes, that is ridiculous. If one is promoting a system radically different to the status quo, one inevitably has to compromise to some extent to make progress, unless you're planning a violent coup or something.
13rules 14y ago
They'd need leadership, training, and materials to actually accomplish anything. Great point... The FBI is taking what is basically a thought crime and pushing that person along until they commit an arrestable offense. Like all government agencies, the FBI (and all departments within it) has to continue to prove it's usefulness in order for everyone to keep their jobs and keep getting nice government salaries and bonuses. So, if there isn't a real terroristic threat, they'll just invent one.

by wisty 14y ago

jeremyarussell 14y ago

They'd need leadership, training, and materials to actually accomplish anything. I just find it ironic that self proclaimed anarchists require leadership to function. Not that I disagree, just, it's a bit funny is all.

sp332 14y ago
Being "lead" isn't the same as being bossed around. As long as the leader doesn't claim some authority over the other members, it can still be "anarchist" leadership.
ceejayoz 14y ago
When I was in college, our floor's resident anarchist ran for (and won) a seat on student council. We found it rather entertaining.
- sp332 14y ago
  Wow, did he even try to justify it? Maybe he's destroying the system from the inside? http://abstrusegoose.com/456 http://abstrusegoose.com/456 :)
- JonnieCache 14y ago
  This argument is fallacious. Would you expect conservatives in 1970s britain to avoid using gas, electricity, trains, the telephone and so on, because they were publicly owned? Do you expect socialists in modern america not to ever use commercial businesses?
  - ceejayoz 14y ago
    Avoid using? No. Avoid running for office on a "I'd like to run the nationalized train system once I get elected" platform? Yes.
    - JonnieCache 14y ago
      Surely the anarchist would have dismantled the power structure and put some kind of heterarchical system in its place, assuming he had the power to do so. If he was just planning to sit in his special chair and laugh it up, then yes, that is ridiculous. If one is promoting a system radically different to the status quo, one inevitably has to compromise to some extent to make progress, unless you're planning a violent coup or something.

13rules 14y ago

They'd need leadership, training, and materials to actually accomplish anything. Great point... The FBI is taking what is basically a thought crime and pushing that person along until they commit an arrestable offense. Like all government agencies, the FBI (and all departments within it) has to continue to prove it's usefulness in order for everyone to keep their jobs and keep getting nice government salaries and bonuses. So, if there isn't a real terroristic threat, they'll just invent one.