In article <199702051706.JAA01075@toad.com> "Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com> writes: From: "Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 97 14:41:32 +0000 X-From-Line: attila@primenet.com Thu Feb 6 15:02:07 1997 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2456" "Wed" "5" "February" "1997" "14:41:32" "+0000" "Attila T. Hun" "attila@primenet.com" "<199702051706.JAA01075@toad.com>" "57" "Re: John's: In anarchy -everyone responsible" nil nil nil "2" "1997020514:41:32" "John's: In anarchy -everyone responsible" (number " " mark "U Attila T. Hun Feb 5 57/2456 " thread-indent "\"Re: John's: In anarchy -everyone responsible\"\n") nil] nil) Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Lines: 57 X-Gnus-Article-Number: 23 Fri Feb 7 00:40:14 1997 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- on or about 970204:2343 jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com> said: +At 09:05 PM 2/4/97 +0000, Attila T. Hun wrote: +> In a "popular" anarchy, Jim Bell's assassination politics make +> perfectly good sense; but, a "popular" anarchy is not an _anarchy_. +I guess I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make, +between a "popular anarchy" and an "anarchy." Maybe you were trying +to distinguish between "dictatorship of the few (or one)" and +"dictatorship of the many (perhaps a majority)" but it didn't come out +very understandably. +Put simply, "anarchy is not the lack of order. It is the lack of +_orders_." disagree. pure anarchy is not the lack of "orders" --pure anarchy implies that everyone is imbued with that perfect sense of responsibility. +> anarchy is only possible in an ideal world where _everyone_ +> assumes not only responsibility for themselves, but for the common +> good. no malice, no greed, no need for assassination politics.... +No, that's traditional thinking and that's wrong. See AP part 8. +Freud believed (as "everyone" else believed, even myself, before AP) +that anarchy was inherently unstable. But it ISN'T, if the tools of +AP are used to stabilize it. And no, no altruism is necessary for AP +to work as well; no individuals are being asked to sacrifice +themselves for the common good. Rather, they are given the +opportunity to work to achieve a reward offered, cumulatively, by a +number of citizens. aah, but that is the difference between a _pure_ anarchy and a _popular_ anarchy. A pure _anarchy_ is sufficiently idealistic in that _noone_ lacks the necessary resonsibility to keep society moving, each individual in their own niche. As long as there is perfect responsibility in a perfect anarchy, then there is no need for AP. AP is a negative, or _punative_, influence; I might liken it to the Catholic Church which is a religion of fear, and an instrument of political control. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be iQCVAwUBMvixAL04kQrCC2kFAQECsQQAlPSQRpEE2dAKkqrWSlPf79QhSBtYbjXa rEyAlOrmi8NOxgyb8hGF/VwVkURUKnPr4gGJW9JvwuPB2x/AQeT11ZEQyVqeFGNF 0W6WR7yv3XsOT9UM6JCP9hFLWU33BumcPd26w8f/Z5mx87qEUoXeJD4ApLv5QNI3 WlyL0xDT1PM= =sfD3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- _______________________________________________________________ Omegaman <mailto:omegam@cmq.com><omega@bigeasy.com) PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2 59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key _______________________________________________________________