Why are you an anarchist?

[vequalsv0plusat]

It's something I've been curious about.

[workerscommunes]

Hmm...do you mean how did I get into anarchism, or why do I sympathise with anarchist ways of thinking?

[vequalsv0plusat]

Workers said:

Hmm...do you mean how did I get into anarchism, or why do I sympathise with anarchist ways of thinking?

Primarily the latter, although the former would be interesting as well.

[workerscommunes]

Well that's a jolly big question, I'm not sure where to begin but I'll get back to you on that...

WC

[Anarchic Tribes]

Why are you an anarchist?

[Anarchic Tribes]

vequalsv0plusat,
I'm suprised you haven't answered my question yet. I mean you started it.
But seriously now I'm really interested. I figured that as you asked the question in the first place you had some idea of how you would answer the question if it was put to you. I think it's an interesting question and quite relative to a recent discussion that took place at enrager where people were discussing what effect their parents political views and/or actions had influenced them. Personally speaking I think I've answered this question on other threads and my question would be more like 'why aren't you an anarchist?', but more on that later.

WC, go on then

[vequalsv0plusat]

Anarchic said:

Why are you an anarchist?

To explain it briefly:

Morality I am defining to be what ought be furthered as an end in itself. By its very definition, morality ought be furthered.
Regardless of the nature of morality, there are certain things required for people to be able to further it. These things should be provided because morality ought be furthered.
In order for people to further morality, they must have the desire to further morality, the capacity to further morality, and the freedom to further morality. If they lack either of these things, they will not be able to further morality.
In order for people to have the freedom to further morality, they must live in a free society. The more free the society, the more freedom these people will have to further morality.
Although it is true that people might further morality more efficiently if they had the freedom to further morality and to do nothing else, it should also be noted that given the different views on the subject we don't really know what morality is and hence any attempt to do this will likely result in morality not being furthered. In the absence of this ignorance I'd probably favor a more regulated society.
Capitalism decreases the net freedom of a society by granting a small amount of freedom to the few while taking a large amount of freedom from the many.
Government decreases the net freedom of a society by enacting unnecessary laws, etc.
For this reason I'm against capitalism and government.
For this reason I consider myself an anarchist, although not an anti-authoritarian.

Though I got into anarchism in the first place by reading this:
www.zabalaza.net/pdfs/sapams/ffa.pdf

[workerscommunes]

Anarchic said:

WC, go on then

Well briefly put, what's the alternative? Every other political system/movement/philosophy/lifestyle seems to rely so heavily on violence, inequality and oppression.

[Liberaregno]

my reason to be an anarchist is...

well i'm not a pure anarchist or pure communist or anything, i take my own road, but i think the most closest equivalents to my thoughts would be somewhere between communism and anarchism and in this game i think the nations closer to mine would not be found in the communistic region but in the anarchistic region

anyway so why i'm an anarchist? well because i believe the western (and all the other's) world order is fucked up and nowadays everything goes before the individuals and the nature. so i thought a real communist system (not a soviet one) would be really good and since i'm a fan of democracy i could possibly not find an equation which would include both democracy and communism because if the system wouldn't be single-party but multiparty then there would be no guarantees of its survivability and if it was singleparty, then it wouldn't be democratic.

so i thought that the anarcho-syndicalist way is maybe the most workable and correct (in my eyes) way for my utopian nation. and i'm talking about direct democracy (i hope you know what i mean). but that part of me is not anarchist which says that there should still be country leaders but i think not in the sense like they are now. but in the sense that people vote for the policies they want the nation to take, then they vote for their "leaders" who may not use their own ideals but people's ideals which are shown by the vote to rule the e.g. foreign policy etc.

was that what you wanted to know?
if you are interested i can tell you more about my ideals, just ask.