We are all political creatures, but often are in denial about it,
because of the bad taste politicians leave in our mouths due to the fact
that they are privileged elites that some of us elect to do something
we would never dare to do.
Yet they are successful sociopaths.
What that means is they hide the truth behind flowery prose and
compliments that make us glad we voted for him.
However, we still
love the politician when he has stolen our tax dollars to build his
fortune due to the same reason why cult leaders can cause his followers
to foment a revolution or failing that, stockpile weapons.
This
is why on the local level, a small collective of individuals develop a
leaderless way of doing things that works. Everyone in that collective
would decide how to sustain their group.
Yet the number one rule shall always be harmony without rule. No one is the boss, but everyone governs his or her own actions.
If this sounds foreign to the gentle reader, then the best example of anarchy is childs' play. The minute any child in a group of children tries to be the leader, the other children rebel and call him "bossy." At which point, the quick-witted kid will abandon his post and apologize.
Then the children will be friends again, and the playing continues.
Hence, children are nascent politicians, but lack the sociopathic qualities of a real politician due to their youth. If only adults could be so innocent, then the world will be less a democracy forced on each of us and more of an anarchy where everyone works in harmony with everyone else, without a ruler.
IMO democracy cannot be forced on another person. Rather the individual relinquishes some of her independence in exchange for the freedoms that democracy provides.
Anarchism is not chaos. It is a committee of self governing people who are their own bosses.
Probably my depiction of anarchism is partially naïve but that is because the New Left have rejected mutualism in favor of a political movement that considers Proudhonian anarchism to be obsolete and mutualism to not be their cup of tea.
Harmony without rule implies that you are able to govern yourself so that you get along with everyone else, regardless of political background.
Yet, too easily, the anarchists fall back to the same them versus us mentality found in a democracy. That is because we are human following the same herd mentality of mammals.
Even so, mutualism is workable but in small groups of people. Sometimes it works even in families.
Showing posts with label anarchism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anarchism. Show all posts
20131226
A Quasi-Political Analysis of Microsoft and the Social Activists (satire)
It's sad that Microsoft has no presence on the competition at Google+. They copied gmail just like Apple copied everyone else with the iPhone.
Just so you know, I don't use my Hotmail account much since 2006. I stopped using Hotmail because of the rise of email spam due to sloppy security.
I also stopped using Yahoo chat circa 2005 due to the increasing risk of being attacked by chatbots since 2001. Though this has been "fixed" by getting rid of chat rooms on Yahoo chat.
Much of this is due to the insecurity of Windows prior to XP and specially of older versions NT server software in general.
This is primarily a Microsoft problem due to their factional nature. They hired right-wing fascists circa early1990s but rarely hire socialists or left-wingers due to the New Left's anti-corporate stance.
You'd only get hired IF and only IF you were paid to infiltrate to do something like what happened to Windows ME (a hack by the left who were annoyed at the right-wing neo-conservative faction using Microsoft addresses to traffic in porn). Though the programmer that kluged ME was a hired gun.
However, the anarchists are canny, because they aren't left or right. Anarchists are known to call the Left fascist for using violence like the Black Bloc (BB) even though the evidence says that most BB are dissatisfied with the old Left and the New Left for not being radical enough. BB use the same tactics as animal activists and other saboteurs. They attack property, not people. Ergo they are non-violent to people.
Right-wing neocon elements in the military & police form attack almost everyone in the name of law. Ergo, the military and police are violent to people and are known to damage property to achieve their objectives.
For they, along with doctor, nurses, teachers, and anyone dealing with the State are usually agents of the State regardless of which side they root for.
Observed events of tactics show that the agents of the state's tactics are representative of patriarchal forms of government. Let's consider the military. Because large groups of military work together, they have a very large number of circles of influence. This is why there is oversight by a command of hierarchy i.e. a commanding officer and the troops in the case of the military.
It cannot be determined what the BB and the New Left are representative of, because the rule is no more than three people are supposed to decide on what to do. This is to limit the circles of influence.
Therefore the New Left does not work by command by hierarchy but by roughly anarchist methods, which is harmonious in very small groups, but in large groups, become chaotic with non-violent groups unintentionally working for the State by blocking BB and similar radicals.
However, anarchists who are pacifist and non-violent tend to use non-violent tactics against the State. Jaggie Singh was a prime example of this: at no time in the past 25 years has there been any evidence of Mr Singh using violence.
Though the Montreal police complained that shooting teddy bears with a jury-rigged sling shot was a form of passive violence i.e. non-violent. This is ridiculous because teddy bears are cute, while tear gas makes your eyes run tears.
Sadly though, there are few articulate pacifists like Singh amongst the New Left, who have gone radical due to their tendency to party a lot and live in denial of their alcoholism and drug addictions.
However, the previous paragraph is not an indictment against the New Left, as their problems with drugs make them aware of what the homeless people face daily.
As it stands now, politics is polarized between the left and the right for the traditional reason that with conflict comes change.
As for myself, as a Buddhist, I cannot be left or right; I'll always be in the middle, rolling and tucking.
Originally posted October 27, 2012 0311H
Just so you know, I don't use my Hotmail account much since 2006. I stopped using Hotmail because of the rise of email spam due to sloppy security.
I also stopped using Yahoo chat circa 2005 due to the increasing risk of being attacked by chatbots since 2001. Though this has been "fixed" by getting rid of chat rooms on Yahoo chat.
Much of this is due to the insecurity of Windows prior to XP and specially of older versions NT server software in general.
This is primarily a Microsoft problem due to their factional nature. They hired right-wing fascists circa early1990s but rarely hire socialists or left-wingers due to the New Left's anti-corporate stance.
You'd only get hired IF and only IF you were paid to infiltrate to do something like what happened to Windows ME (a hack by the left who were annoyed at the right-wing neo-conservative faction using Microsoft addresses to traffic in porn). Though the programmer that kluged ME was a hired gun.
However, the anarchists are canny, because they aren't left or right. Anarchists are known to call the Left fascist for using violence like the Black Bloc (BB) even though the evidence says that most BB are dissatisfied with the old Left and the New Left for not being radical enough. BB use the same tactics as animal activists and other saboteurs. They attack property, not people. Ergo they are non-violent to people.
Right-wing neocon elements in the military & police form attack almost everyone in the name of law. Ergo, the military and police are violent to people and are known to damage property to achieve their objectives.
For they, along with doctor, nurses, teachers, and anyone dealing with the State are usually agents of the State regardless of which side they root for.
Observed events of tactics show that the agents of the state's tactics are representative of patriarchal forms of government. Let's consider the military. Because large groups of military work together, they have a very large number of circles of influence. This is why there is oversight by a command of hierarchy i.e. a commanding officer and the troops in the case of the military.
It cannot be determined what the BB and the New Left are representative of, because the rule is no more than three people are supposed to decide on what to do. This is to limit the circles of influence.
Therefore the New Left does not work by command by hierarchy but by roughly anarchist methods, which is harmonious in very small groups, but in large groups, become chaotic with non-violent groups unintentionally working for the State by blocking BB and similar radicals.
However, anarchists who are pacifist and non-violent tend to use non-violent tactics against the State. Jaggie Singh was a prime example of this: at no time in the past 25 years has there been any evidence of Mr Singh using violence.
Though the Montreal police complained that shooting teddy bears with a jury-rigged sling shot was a form of passive violence i.e. non-violent. This is ridiculous because teddy bears are cute, while tear gas makes your eyes run tears.
Sadly though, there are few articulate pacifists like Singh amongst the New Left, who have gone radical due to their tendency to party a lot and live in denial of their alcoholism and drug addictions.
However, the previous paragraph is not an indictment against the New Left, as their problems with drugs make them aware of what the homeless people face daily.
As it stands now, politics is polarized between the left and the right for the traditional reason that with conflict comes change.
As for myself, as a Buddhist, I cannot be left or right; I'll always be in the middle, rolling and tucking.
Originally posted October 27, 2012 0311H
20131223
My Personal Buddhist Anarchist Creed
The following commandment is the Buddhist Anarchist creed:
Control thyself then no one controls thee.
Both the Sufis and the Ch'an/Zen Buddhists know about self control. In Islam, it is the greater jihad, greater than the lesser jihad aka "the holy war".
If the People, be they Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Neo-pagans, La Vey Satanists or even Wicca, were to practise this commandment in addition to their doctrines & dogmas, then the State would have little reason to go to war.
Corporations would be kinder, and CEOs would become patrons of artists of all stripes, be it audio, visual or kaleidoscopic AV.
Control thyself is the antidote to know thyself.
In knowing thyself, you might be blinded by the ego; merely controlling the ego is enough to see it for what it is: the root of anger, fear, and the handmaidens of desire, lust and passion.
Yet the hedonists amongst the People ask "What's wrong with desire? You sound old-fashioned."
To that, I reply "But there is much to be said for romance, and to court your lover. It helps make lust more interesting and passion become compassionate!"
If a warrior controlled himself, then no one would control him. Then he would make a fine monk to contemplate the end of war and a place for Pax Terra, which is a utopia called World Peace.
Then the military spending could be curtailed and the military men become paid volunteers to help when disaster strikes and to aid the police in ensuring the safety of the People, great and small.
Thus is it my sincere wish that the People learn to control themselves individually, so that no one controls them. In this way, the State will be the People's instrument to help perpetuate this peace to the stars.
Until then, space travel is folly because for every space walk for the People there is another for the State in secret for the good of the nation, so says the Military Industry Complex.
When the People practice self control, they will control the State and turn the swords of the Military into the instruments of peace.
How do you control yourself? First we begin with the only mind control, for the fake mind control ignores the fact that brain-washing succeeds when its victim decides to be controlled by her oppressor.
What is this mind control called? Meditation.
How is it practiced? Just Google "meditation", and with practice of it, you shall be free to control and empower yourself in harmony with the greater good.
Originally posted: November 4, 2012 at 1:52 AM
Control thyself then no one controls thee.
Both the Sufis and the Ch'an/Zen Buddhists know about self control. In Islam, it is the greater jihad, greater than the lesser jihad aka "the holy war".
If the People, be they Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Neo-pagans, La Vey Satanists or even Wicca, were to practise this commandment in addition to their doctrines & dogmas, then the State would have little reason to go to war.
Corporations would be kinder, and CEOs would become patrons of artists of all stripes, be it audio, visual or kaleidoscopic AV.
Control thyself is the antidote to know thyself.
In knowing thyself, you might be blinded by the ego; merely controlling the ego is enough to see it for what it is: the root of anger, fear, and the handmaidens of desire, lust and passion.
Yet the hedonists amongst the People ask "What's wrong with desire? You sound old-fashioned."
To that, I reply "But there is much to be said for romance, and to court your lover. It helps make lust more interesting and passion become compassionate!"
If a warrior controlled himself, then no one would control him. Then he would make a fine monk to contemplate the end of war and a place for Pax Terra, which is a utopia called World Peace.
Then the military spending could be curtailed and the military men become paid volunteers to help when disaster strikes and to aid the police in ensuring the safety of the People, great and small.
Thus is it my sincere wish that the People learn to control themselves individually, so that no one controls them. In this way, the State will be the People's instrument to help perpetuate this peace to the stars.
Until then, space travel is folly because for every space walk for the People there is another for the State in secret for the good of the nation, so says the Military Industry Complex.
When the People practice self control, they will control the State and turn the swords of the Military into the instruments of peace.
How do you control yourself? First we begin with the only mind control, for the fake mind control ignores the fact that brain-washing succeeds when its victim decides to be controlled by her oppressor.
What is this mind control called? Meditation.
How is it practiced? Just Google "meditation", and with practice of it, you shall be free to control and empower yourself in harmony with the greater good.
Originally posted: November 4, 2012 at 1:52 AM
20130617
Don't Be Evil When Liberty is At Stake
"Do the right thing: don't be evil. Honesty and Integrity in all we do. Our business practices are beyond reproach. We make money by doing good things." — Google Core Values
Reactionary anarchism is partially motivated by negative liberty - the freedom from coercion. By participating on their side, a person's freedom to be / freedom to exercise one's potential - the epitome of positive liberty - is severely limited to attending meetings and participating in direct action.
If anyone chooses to study society by social intercourse with it, then one is suspected of being a traitor.
However, revolutionaries who exercise negative liberty using the same means of oppression as their foes (coercion through violence) whilst calling it liberty cannot be distinguished from their foes.
In order for any revolution to be enacted with the least amount of harm and succeed, the revolutionary must be committed to non-violent confrontation and constructive dialogue with free market society.
The reason why I choose "free market" rather than "bourgeois" is because the latter term was co-opted by the socialists, whose experiment with government resulted in the failed Soviet regime due to corruption of the communist elites who replaced the aristocrats and the Czarist regime.
In this context, "free market" refers to the epitome of both positive and negative liberty, which is free market capitalism. Even though there are regulations in place to control the financial market, one is still free to exercise his or her full potential to realize financial success.
Yet there will always be professional jealousy to motivate the purveyors of negative liberty to find the weaknesses of their business rivals, and who will pervert positive liberty by exercising the deep dark recesses of their potential in unexpected ways.
Thus, I find the antidote to this to be Google's maxim: don't be evil.
Caveat: note that the maxim provided still allows one to commit a lesser evil i.e. exposing Internet users who use multiple IDs to "manufacture" composite personas as part of their trolling activity, and in essence, "killing" fake people who only exist online.
Another example is when a policeman uses his taser to stop a suicidal person with a knife.
In business, the truth is often created in a way to maximize profits, usually by omitting anything that will negate the key selling points. This is why alternative health supplements rarely reach universal acceptance because all you need is one doctor to declare that medication is more effective, and mass media may use that declaration of medical opinion as statement of fact to erase support.
Reference:
Don't be evil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil
Reactionary anarchism is partially motivated by negative liberty - the freedom from coercion. By participating on their side, a person's freedom to be / freedom to exercise one's potential - the epitome of positive liberty - is severely limited to attending meetings and participating in direct action.
If anyone chooses to study society by social intercourse with it, then one is suspected of being a traitor.
However, revolutionaries who exercise negative liberty using the same means of oppression as their foes (coercion through violence) whilst calling it liberty cannot be distinguished from their foes.
In order for any revolution to be enacted with the least amount of harm and succeed, the revolutionary must be committed to non-violent confrontation and constructive dialogue with free market society.
The reason why I choose "free market" rather than "bourgeois" is because the latter term was co-opted by the socialists, whose experiment with government resulted in the failed Soviet regime due to corruption of the communist elites who replaced the aristocrats and the Czarist regime.
In this context, "free market" refers to the epitome of both positive and negative liberty, which is free market capitalism. Even though there are regulations in place to control the financial market, one is still free to exercise his or her full potential to realize financial success.
Yet there will always be professional jealousy to motivate the purveyors of negative liberty to find the weaknesses of their business rivals, and who will pervert positive liberty by exercising the deep dark recesses of their potential in unexpected ways.
Thus, I find the antidote to this to be Google's maxim: don't be evil.
Caveat: note that the maxim provided still allows one to commit a lesser evil i.e. exposing Internet users who use multiple IDs to "manufacture" composite personas as part of their trolling activity, and in essence, "killing" fake people who only exist online.
Another example is when a policeman uses his taser to stop a suicidal person with a knife.
In business, the truth is often created in a way to maximize profits, usually by omitting anything that will negate the key selling points. This is why alternative health supplements rarely reach universal acceptance because all you need is one doctor to declare that medication is more effective, and mass media may use that declaration of medical opinion as statement of fact to erase support.
Reference:
Don't be evil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil
20080311
Anarchism: the Path to Freedom and Self-Determination (poem)
"Think globally, act locally."
Pundits told us to embrace this
with open heart, but what did it get us?
Homelessness has gripped our cities,
and with tacit approval of DEA
by Ottawa, gang-related crime has risen.
In response, the social fascists support
harsh treatment of gang-related violence.
Yet this does nothing to solve that violence;
it merely perpetuates oppression of the poor.
"Think locally, act globally."
This is the response of rich social capitalists,
who pour money into poor countries,
sacrificing environmental sustainability
for profit, which is just laundering
money best spent on relieving homelessness and poverty.
If Ottawa was really concerned about the poor,
then how come it has dumped the problem on the provinces?
If each province was truly concerned
about the plight of the poor,
then why does it not protest the myths
perpetuated by the media?
It's a waste of money to criminalize poverty,
yet that is what the State has done.
It digs its heels at relieving oppression
of the mentally ill, and perpetuates
a class warfare mentality among its people.
Yet should we rise to challenge the State,
what guarantees do we have to be treated right,
and not be discounted as "kooks" or worse,
treated like criminals or even, terrorists?
So I'd rather think and act locally,
but remember the plight of the minorities
whose blood was spilled for freedom
and self-determination.
Forget nationalism - its legacy threatens freedom.
Forget socialism - within its heart hides fascism.
Forget state democracy - fascists have perverted its cause.
Thus, anarchism - which supports the family and the tribe -
is the only path to true freedom and self-determination.
Pundits told us to embrace this
with open heart, but what did it get us?
Homelessness has gripped our cities,
and with tacit approval of DEA
by Ottawa, gang-related crime has risen.
In response, the social fascists support
harsh treatment of gang-related violence.
Yet this does nothing to solve that violence;
it merely perpetuates oppression of the poor.
"Think locally, act globally."
This is the response of rich social capitalists,
who pour money into poor countries,
sacrificing environmental sustainability
for profit, which is just laundering
money best spent on relieving homelessness and poverty.
If Ottawa was really concerned about the poor,
then how come it has dumped the problem on the provinces?
If each province was truly concerned
about the plight of the poor,
then why does it not protest the myths
perpetuated by the media?
It's a waste of money to criminalize poverty,
yet that is what the State has done.
It digs its heels at relieving oppression
of the mentally ill, and perpetuates
a class warfare mentality among its people.
Yet should we rise to challenge the State,
what guarantees do we have to be treated right,
and not be discounted as "kooks" or worse,
treated like criminals or even, terrorists?
So I'd rather think and act locally,
but remember the plight of the minorities
whose blood was spilled for freedom
and self-determination.
Forget nationalism - its legacy threatens freedom.
Forget socialism - within its heart hides fascism.
Forget state democracy - fascists have perverted its cause.
Thus, anarchism - which supports the family and the tribe -
is the only path to true freedom and self-determination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)