Rambone claims he's not an anarchist

[steveh_131]

It means if I can kick your ass, I get to make whatever rules I like until someone that can kick my ass comes along. It may not mean that when you're high as a kite in the dorm room pretending to be intellectual and deep, but that's how it shakes out in the real world.

There's always someone making the rules and threatening to kick your ass. That doesn't change.

 

[jsharmon7]

I am glad our founding fathers did not take this position...

They had a realistic view and made it as such.

EDIT: I agree with the OP that rambone has posted here. However, after reading most of the threads he has started, I don't feel like his posting history supports the OP. He seems far more concerned with wild conspiracy theories and outrageously misleading thread titles that are completely unsupported by the articles linked. If all of the crazy things he's posted here are his way of supporting the beliefs he espoused in the OP, he sure has a funny way of showing it. Why not just say it like he did in this thread than to post dozens of links to misrepresented stories?

 

[mrjarrell]

It means if I can kick your ass, I get to make whatever rules I like until someone that can kick my ass comes along. It may not mean that when you're high as a kite in the dorm room pretending to be intellectual and deep, but that's how it shakes out in the real world.

No, that's not what it means at all. As you'd know if you knew anything about anarchistic philosophy and it's schools. If you tried to kick my ass, I'd be well within my rights to shoot you dead, just as I am with the current system. In other systems my security folks might just shoot you for me or convince you of the error of your ways. I'd suggest you actually study up on the subject, but I figure that won't happen. You apparently already know it all.

 

[Rob377]

No, that's not what it means at all. As you'd know if you knew anything about anarchistic philosophy and it's schools. If you tried to kick my ass, I'd be well within my rights to shoot you dead, just as I am with the current system. In other systems my security folks might just shoot you for me or convince you of the error of your ways. I'd suggest you actually study up on the subject, but I figure that won't happen. You apparently already know it all.

My security people are bigger, better armed, and better trained, and have already ambushed your security people and taken them out. I make the rules.

 

[steveh_131]

My security people are bigger, better armed, and better trained, and have already ambushed your security people and taken them out. I make the rules.

I take this to mean you didn't do any of the studying that he recommended.

 

[Zoub]

I'm confused. Are you trying to say that Mexico, with a corrupt government and police force, is an example of anarchy?

No, I am saying when a gang is willing to extort the Govt you have something major going on. Remember, teachers work for the Govt so when the gang threatens the entire educational system, they are telling the govt to F'off, this is no mans land

The gangs are organized, motivated and of course well armed. Civil war, anarchy, what comes next?

 

[jsharmon7]

No, that's not what it means at all. As you'd know if you knew anything about anarchistic philosophy and it's schools. If you tried to kick my ass, I'd be well within my rights to shoot you dead, just as I am with the current system. In other systems my security folks might just shoot you for me or convince you of the error of your ways. I'd suggest you actually study up on the subject, but I figure that won't happen. You apparently already know it all.

Anyplace in particular you'd suggest to look? In my mind, anarchy relies on people wanting to leave each other alone, and be left alone. That completely goes against human nature. So, I'm assuming my understanding of the ideas of anarchy are not quite that simple.

 

[Rob377]

I take this to mean you didn't do any of the studying that he recommended.

Take it however you'd like. But you'd be wrong. Just because I don't buy the nonsense doesn't mean I haven't studied up on it.

Whether it's Marx's Classless Society or Anarchist's rulerless society, it's all variations on the same pseudo-intellectual utopian claptrap that sounds really cool on paper but doesn't actually work when you introduce people into the equation. And considering they're systems for structuring peoples' interactions, that's a fatal flaw.

Such a system can't exist, and if implemented quickly devolves into the local warlord arrangement found in any number of third world poop-holes.

The "it could work if only we had the right people" argument didn't hold water with communism, and doesn't here.

 

[mrjarrell]

Anyplace in particular you'd suggest to look? In my mind, anarchy relies on people wanting to leave each other alone, and be left alone. That completely goes against human nature. So, I'm assuming my understanding of the ideas of anarchy are not quite that simple.

You could look online for the works of many of them. Mikhail Bakunin, Lysander Spooner, Benjamin Tucker, Thoreau, Proudhon, Albert J. Nock, Murray Rothbard and others have works available free online in many formats. Then there are authors from the various schools of thought on the matter, Claire Wolfe, L. Neil Smith, J. Neil Schulman and others, too. At it's simplest it is just leaving folks alone to live their own lives in peace. And, I contend that it's not contrary to human nature. The vast majority of us do it every day, it's only a depraved few that do otherwise, and they can be culled or corralled, just as they are today. The majority of people in the world are decent people looking to be left alone and not wishing to be victims of aggression.

 

[Expat]

Wow... Perhaps all of us should make our own thread about ourselves. We can see who has the most sycophants police the thread for us. Whoever has the most, wins.

 

[rambone]

Wow... Perhaps all of us should make our own thread about ourselves.

I made this thread because I got called an anarchist 4 times in one day. That's a new personal record... I think.

 

[jsgolfman]

lol, you practice anarchism everyday yet pretend on an anonymous forum that it's all psycho-babble for the over-educated hippies. You really crack me up

 

[MadBomber]

I made this thread because I got called an anarchist 4 times in one day. That's a new personal record... I think.

Big deal.....Joe Williams once called me a liberal liar four times in ONE THREAD!

 

[Bunnykid68]

Here goes you are an anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist. That's five times in one second.

Rambone I do get where you are coming from even with some of the more off the wall titles and posts.

There are only 2 things that will fix this country.
1) Take away the voting rights of those that get something for nothing
2) Those that get something for nothing out vote everyone else and the SHTF because it just will not support itself.

 

[gunman41mag]

Rambone is OK, do you really care what people think

 

[Kase]

Here goes you are an anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist. That's five times in one second.

Rambone I do get where you are coming from even with some of the more off the wall titles and posts.

There are only 2 things that will fix this country.
1) Take away the voting rights of those that get something for nothing
2) Those that get something for nothing out vote everyone else and the SHTF because it just will not support itself.

I'm thinking more along the lines of #2

 

[Bunnykid68]

I'm thinking more along the lines of #2

Unfortunately

 

[Whosyer]

intertesting

Which part do you find interesting ?

 

[Rob377]

Which part do you find interesting ?

I'm guessing he thinks the 50 post requirement is interesting.

 

[bingley]

EDIT: I agree with the OP that rambone has posted here. However, after reading most of the threads he has started, I don't feel like his posting history supports the OP. He seems far more concerned with wild conspiracy theories and outrageously misleading thread titles that are completely unsupported by the articles linked. If all of the crazy things he's posted here are his way of supporting the beliefs he espoused in the OP, he sure has a funny way of showing it. Why not just say it like he did in this thread than to post dozens of links to misrepresented stories?

This is a smart response, and I thought it's something worth thinking about. My sense from reading INGO on and off (I actually have a life, and I don't live in my mom's basement) is that though Rambone falls prey to conspiratorial thinking occasionally, he may not be doing it more frequently than any of us, and certainly no more frequently than many political pundits on left or on the right.

What is conspiracy theory? The belief that important social, political, or economic events are due to the efforts of a covert group which the conspiracy theorist wants to expose to the public. Usually the truth test for a theory is whether it fits the political leanings, personal fears, etc. of the theorist. The verification process is often biased, incomplete, and selective. I think Rambone's distrust of strong central authority has led him to scrutinize certain events very closely as potential examples of Big Government pulling a fast one on us. This is no crazier than what Glenn Beck or any of the other TV hosts does every show. The difference is that they have a different target (the left, the right, whatever).

For the record, I disagree with some key elements of of his position, but he is articulate and pure in motive, that I feel talking with him is productive. The same cannot be said of the sort of posts that make no attempt at laying out a logical argument, and jump right to condemnation and expression of personal opinions. An argument is not an election where you vote yes or no. It's a Thunderdome where your champion, in the guise of your words, fight others. So I appeal to INGO posters, unless you're a wise man who can say all that needs to be said in one sentence, you need multiple paragraphs. Size matters. Just ask your woman.

Da Bing