From: Omegaman <omega@jolietjake.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 06:12:23 -0800 (PST)
To: "Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: John's: In anarchy -everyone responsible
Message-ID: <199702111412.GAA19459@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


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
_______________________________________________________________