UCD Public Meeting on Anarchism (2 Viewers)

[egg_]

What is all this hand-waving for? The strange guy - do you actually think that anyone at this meeting has any kind of real intention of starting an anarchist revolution? Not at all. It's just an enjoyable evening talking about how to improve people's lot, with an emphasis on personal freedom, no?

AFAIK, pretty much all hunter-gatherer societies are/were anarchist. It's not as if an anarchist society can't exist, y'know? Can an hi-tech anarchist society exist? Ask me in 10000 years

 

[Froog]

google ads -> Ireland Adventure tours, award winning 4x4 adventure.

 

[broken arm]

technology/infrastructure in a less chaotic situation? = more possible.

what technology was developed in Somalia?

if you are interested in the development of technology and innovation in uncertain systems I'd suggest you look into things like neo-schumpeterian economics.....

 

[broken arm]

an an hi-tech anarchist society exist? Ask me in 10000 years

what about the intuitive parallels between anarchism and free-market capitalism?

 

[maims bond]

what about the intuitive parallels between anarchism and free-market capitalism?

or even anarcho-capitalism? Somalis can run for a long time, is that technology?

 

[kthozoid]

what technology was developed in Somalia?

if you are interested in the development of technology and innovation in uncertain systems I'd suggest you look into things like neo-schumpeterian economics.....

i don't know of any technology that was developed in Somalia. it wasn't the point i was trying to make. the fact that telecom systems have managed to flourish in an otherwise thoroughly messed up place would seem to indicate that central government is not a prerequisite for some kind of infrastructure in this case. that it happens in such a dysfunctional country would seem to suggest that it's even more likely to be possible in more developed countries.
thanks for the Schumpeter thing. i'm trying to melt my tiny brain with it at the moment. (not very successfully)

 

[kthozoid]

let's not forget the present boom industry in maritime piracy there either. i reckon they must be world-leaders in that area.

 

[taubstumm]

it wasn't the point i was trying to make.

welkum 2 teh internets

 

[broken arm]

The emergence of a telecoms infrastructure in Somalia is a pure form of free-market capitalism.

The funny thing being that the anarcho-capitalists in Somalia are adopting and benefiting from a technological infrastructure that was developed outside of their system. Kind of like the anarchists living of the dole.....

that dole joke gets old.

 

[kthozoid]

it is free market capitalism for sure. i'd be surprised though if there was a mobile phone network (masts etc.) in Somalia prior to 1991, when they last had a functioning government.

 

[the strange guy]

What is all this hand-waving for? The strange guy - do you actually think that anyone at this meeting has any kind of real intention of starting an anarchist revolution? Not at all. It's just an enjoyable evening talking about how to improve people's lot, with an emphasis on personal freedom, no?

If you have not yet met an anarchist who truly believes in
their ability to free humankind from their shackles with
their own personal brand of politics after the revolution,
you have not lived.
So yeh, I'm pretty sure that the UCD Anarchists are
read up on post-revolution anarchy and would probably
have the intention to begin a revolution given the
opportunity, but of course I'm basing this on total
guesswork as you could probably imagine, I don't
hang out with them!

AFAIK, pretty much all hunter-gatherer societies are/were anarchist. It's not as if an anarchist society can't exist, y'know?

It's not like I was around at the time, but I'd bet tribal
chiefs and regular warfare were pretty common in these
societies which goes against the anarchy ethos.

i don't know of any technology that was developed in Somalia. it wasn't the point i was trying to make. the fact that telecom systems have managed to flourish in an otherwise thoroughly messed up place would seem to indicate that central government is not a prerequisite for some kind of infrastructure in this case. that it happens in such a dysfunctional country would seem to suggest that it's even more likely to be possible in more developed countries.

Ah, I don't know where to start. I think broken arm made
great points on why your admiration for telecoms
entrepreneurship in a time of chaos and warlords is misguided.
Central government is usually an inhibitor when it comes
to freemarket capitalism. The more government
involvement, the less free a market becomes. To see
transmitting towers going up in the absence of some sort of
state licence to operate is not shocking. If licences were
abolished here tomorrow they would be popping up
everywhere! Cellular mobile technology only requires
cellular mobile infrastructure (for mobile-to-mobile all you
need is phones, SIMs and transmitting towers), so arguing
that this technology can flourish in the absence of
infrastructure makes no sense, or at least I don't fully
understand the point you're tring to make.

To make a comparison between this and how even the
most basic technologies that we have become accustomed
to can survive under an anarchic revolution makes zero
sense, which is the point I think you were trying to make.
Where there is money, technology can be bought or
developed; where there is money to be made, this
technology can be maintained. Take money out of the
equation in a country that cannot manufacture its own
hardware or the tools to maintain them and you're left with
nothing.

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

reading this is like watching a political debate on tv - everyone ignoring the main issue and going overboard arguing about irrelevant points that nobody made in order to avoid discussing the original issue. im not very well read or informed about any of this stuff so i dont really have an opinion either way but it seems that the strange guy has raised practical questions about the nuts and bolts of an anarchist society, how it might function etc and the only responses have been to shout him down on the basis of semantic inconsistancies in his use of language rather than by addressing the central points that he raised (apart from the mobile phones in somalia thing which got nonsensically hijacked).

 

[broken arm]

reading this is like watching a political debate on tv - everyone ignoring the main issue and going overboard arguing about irrelevant points that nobody made in order to avoid discussing the original issue. im not very well read or informed about any of this stuff so i dont really have an opinion either way but it seems that the strange guy has raised practical questions about the nuts and bolts of an anarchist society, how it might function etc and the only responses have been to shout him down on the basis of semantic inconsistancies in his use of language rather than by addressing the central points that he raised (apart from the mobile phones in somalia thing which got nonsensically hijacked).

so what's your point t.v. analogy dude?

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

so what's your point t.v. analogy dude?

my point was that points are being avoided. it was just an observation

 

[broken arm]

my point was that points are being avoided. it was just an observation

sound.

what was the point though?

 

[the strange guy]

Fuck points, how about the UCD 5 point plan for Anarchy!

1. Organise
2. Overthrow
3. Occupy
4. ?????
5. ONORCHIST UTOPIA

They're just stuck on the fourth point.

 

[broken arm]

Fuck points, .

yea, fuck points AND lists. networks is where it's at..

 

[kthozoid]

the strange guy- apologies, i quoted you in bold as i couldn't figure out the multi-quote thing. but don't worry, i've got society figured out. except the how do you repress everyone you don't agree with? part.

'Ah, I don't know where to start.'

well, it's a relief to know that there is so accomplished a sophist as your good self in our midst.

'I think broken arm made great points on why your admiration for telecoms
entrepreneurship in a time of chaos and warlords is misguided. '

i think (although assume is probably more accurate) that broken arm may well have understood by now that i don't necessarily admire telecom entrepreneurs in Somalia any more the i would have admired the Orbit of the Planet Uranus around the Sun, had i found that phenomenon somehow relevant to the argument.

here is an excessive example, just so we are clear on this:
' the Nazi concentration camps in Auschwitz I & II, Belsen-Bergen, Dachau and other such places were very efficient at accomplishing the goals of exterminating those regarded as undesirable by the leaders of the society who were responsible for the construction of these same camps.'

(i'm assuming that you are assuming that i am some kind of rabid-limp-wristed-left-leaning-type and reveling in the dark tastelessness of the above necessity)

it's exasperating to repeatedly explain that stating a given fact does not immediately imply an empathic connection to that fact. yet you choose to ignore this constantly with boisterous rhetoric. however, i'm personalizing this and as Shaney has rightly pointed out, it is diverting the focus of this discussion from your initial and valid critiques.

ok, contininuing on sort of (bear with me):

'To see transmitting towers going up in the absence of some sort of
state licence to operate is not shocking. If licences were
abolished here tomorrow they would be popping up
everywhere! ..... so arguing
that this technology can flourish in the absence of
infrastructure makes no sense, or at least I don't fully
understand the point you're tring to make.'

we seem to be agreed, however, you also seem to maintain an enduring faith in the ability of currency to maintain this system:

'Where there is money, technology can be bought or
developed; where there is money to be made, this
technology can be maintained. Take money out of the
equation in a country that cannot manufacture its own
hardware or the tools to maintain them and you're left with
nothing.'

yet you also state on the same point (earlier post):

' (a telecoms revolution) has nothing to do with a
flourishing anti-bureaucracy and more to do with survival.'

so you narrowly funnel the challenges of survival through the prism of a monetaristic capitalistic system? ok, it's a well trodden point, but surely, particularily given the present economic zeitgeist, ones faith in such a system could hardly be unshakable.
i tend to agree with your view that an attempted maintenance of present technological/industrial norms would be realized through the impetus of a survival impulse. i disagree that the basis for this continuation need be exclusively capitalist.

'Central government is usually an inhibitor when it comes
to freemarket capitalism.'

also valid. it's also an inhibitor of ideas and creative thinking, as the Soviet Union clearly did in the 50's 60's especially, from genetics all the way to the arts. it is quite possible that the shedding of a hierarchical government would not adversely affect the creative impulse of the human urge to deal with any facets of societal injustice or inequality . as you cogently pointed out, the vacuum of control has facilitated the development of a thoroughly modern technological enterprise. need this initiative be solely confined to the field of competitive entrepreneurship? is it not equally as radical to imply that all human progress is inextricably tied to purely economical forces?
if so, then that's as bleak a world view as the supposed apocalyptic meltdown you have suggested in your earlier posts. the mark of a compassionate or progressive society might seek to transcend such atavistic urges. yet maybe you are right. perhaps it is an idea ahead of its time.

 

[Froog]

in fairness kthozoid, the somalia telecoms "point" is the stupidest fucking thing i've heard in ages. no wonder people wouldn't let it go.

 

[broken arm]

kthozoid. we're obviously missing your point. can you make it a bit more clear.

Maybe don't use an analogy to support a point you are making without supporting it with your position if you actually dispute the premise of it.