Uploaded by Selenophile 
2993x2969 JPG 2.52 MB
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
more penny engraving!
Privacy Policy has been updated to reflect what data will be collected from you in the future updates. Read the updated version here.
I recommend reading the conversation we had a few months ago on that exact topic. ^^
A dumb and outdated law.
While literally Anarchy translates to “Without (a) leader”, the phrase was originally coined during a period of history where kings, chieftains and oligarchies were the only governments to be found - the first Democracy would not be founded for a few centuries after this phrase was coined. It has always been used to denote the chaotic period between governments. Ergo, Background Pony Number 17 is correct, a democracy is led by the people, ergo, cannot be in a state of anarchy. Furthermore, a quick look at the YPG lists co-chairmen, I.e. a Leader. A (less quick) look into the many factions under the Republican Spain banner note many leaders, though none of them were very influential. Or should I bring up the OG leader of a Direct Democracy? Pericles.
I will reiterate, it’s a buzzword, attached to other political words to make it sound counter-culture.
Here Direct Democracy is a government devoid of a leader, in which the people’s vote directly determines what actions the country takes, there is still law and order, just no leader, instead the people vote on everything and anyone can suggest potential policies. To see this system in practice look at the Spanish Republic and Kurdistan Both of these are technically anarchist countries and follow a socioeconomic system called Anarcho-Communism.
Actually, no. Both “democracy” and “oligarchy” imply a leadership, “the people” (demos) in the first case, and “the few” (oligos) in the second case. Anarchy has always implied chaos; it’s a state of being where there’s no leadership to prevent people from turning on one another like animals.
Anarchy simply means “a country without a leader” while I can see how it’s meaning has devolved into meaning “chaos” I still prefer it’s original meaning since it can technically mean various forms of democracy or oligarchy.
I have to say this right out of the gate, this is one of my pet peeves. ‘Anarchist’/‘anarchy’ has become a buzzword in the last generation and its meaning seems to have been forgotten. A (meaning without), archy (order/ authority)…so what you’ve described is a self-contradiction. Anarchy is literally what happens when a country breaks down. The moment you implement democracy, it ceases to be anarchy.
Then again… there is always the potentiality of ocean and space colonization. I suppose.
The video claims it doesn’t know if UBI is a good idea or not. No idea if it is myself either. If a country of significant standing uses it I’d consider trying it out, but I feel there’s probably a reason we aren’t all already in a similar system.
A lot of people would enjoy evading work and I can’t honestly blame them. But if it only exists as an idea then there’s not much hope for it; there aren’t any new places left to sprout new countries and new governments.
Edited
I’ve done a lot of research into the subject tbh, but like i said before i simply disagree. It’s easy to say all of this, just like its easy to make communism sound good on paper, but when applied to real world individuals and countries I highly doubt it will work as planned. A country 15 trillion in debt or whatever can’t guarantee $1000 a month per person to all of it’s 326 million people. It makes sense to say it will also stimulate the economy until you realize that goods and services carry a value based on the man hours and effort put into them.
Man hours and effort put in because that’s how you make a successful product that sells and makes money;
it’s an oversimplification of the countries issues and if it happens I believe the US will fall just like all of the other empires do somewhere around 200 years after they are created. there’s nothing i can do but sit back and watch but i feel very strongly that this is not the answer no matter how many flashy youtube vids narrated by British ppl are out there xD (look at Britain and brexit, is trying to lure us in with British ppl really the best idea, they’re self destructing over there as well)
Edited
Well… This
it kinda the way ppl work now, we wont do anything if its more trouble than the alternative. i know i wouldn’t work if i didn’t have to (although i would draw and be making things, so idk if that’s a counter point), i’m locked in a seemingly endless job search despite having abilities to perform a number of jobs. idk all guaranteed income will do is either make ppl lazy or DRASTICALLY increase the price of all goods and services.
it sounds good on paper but these kind of ideas won’t work in the real world. the soviet union proved that society in the modern age isn’t working in the “ideal” ways so we have to focus on the practical ways if we want to run a successful country, sucky as it may be
I’m open to new ideas for how to run the world or even the country, but so far the ideas presented just aren’t practical imo (and i realize a lot of this is simply opinions and i’m particularly pessimistic and realistic when it comes to change, i don’t claim to have all the answers)
We could automate as much as possible to help with jobs, and here’s a question I ask for anyone when they bring up the problem of doing a job if you aren’t paid… Would you go to your job if it was made into a nice place to be?
i agree the rat race of the 21st century is a recipe for unrest and depression, but it’s the way the world works and eliminating money is not the solution, nor is this $1000 a month guaranteed income crap the ppl are talking about with the 2020 US election. i agree having to pay as much as we do for rent every month sucks and it means soon i will also be in some dead end sucky job, but the idea that anyone will do anything if they don’t have to is ridiculous. money exists for a reason, and it’s the best solution to a shitty problem society has come up with so far unfortunately
Anarchist countries work off a form of direct democracy, where everyone votes on everything, while it was far from efficient in the past, now we have computers to aid in the voting.
The moment you throw ‘anarcho’ into anything, you lost me. Your entire philosophy is a pleasant dream, with no path into reality. Perhaps within a total vacuum Syndicalism MIGHT work, but in the real world, the first nation to come along would stomp it flat. The Founding Fathers of the United States tried something similar with the Articles of Confederation; the state was so weak, frail and useless, it fell apart within a decade.
You don’t have to live under the thumb of money. There are communities of people that leave the system to live in a way that doesn’t require much - if any - money to keep their community going.
But it’s a LOT of work. You actually build everything. A lot of your food will be dumpster-dived from restaurants and grocery stores (they throw out decent grade food despite the expiration dates). I’m sure they don’t have things such as the internet.
Currency is pretty much a way to simplify trading. You want something? Trade for it. Don’t have anything to trade? Do favors (i.e. work) for something to trade (i.e. money). Money is simply an item everyone in general is interested in trading for. Nothing more, nothing less. You have complete control over whether or not you let money control your life.
You won’t change the world by complaining about it though. Complaining only annoys people.
You can however go to communities that share your living interests. There are many to choose from.
Syndicalism: Capitalism, but cheaper and democratic
The whole idea of a farmer working all year round to produce food for you and NOT get rewarded - I.e. paid - for his effort offends me. Until our robot overlords take over, the economy is driven by manpower, your money is manhours. C’est la vie.
Sorry about that, talking about money makes me angry…