Skip to main content

View Diary: why aren't republicans called anarchists? (74 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're ignroing the definition supplied by our (0+ / 0-)

    resident academic expert, who says, "Anarchist society is thus well organized, but instead of top-down control by elites, it is bottom up self-management by the citizens of each community. The communities in turn form federations to which delegates are sent, whom are recallable and mandated to serve the will of the communities. The federations are formed on local, regional, and international levels."

    Sounds like representative government by his definition.

    The elevation of appearance over substance, of celebrity over character, of short term gains over lasting achievement displays a poverty of ambition. It distracts you from what's truly important. - Barack Obama

    by helfenburg on Sun May 12, 2013 at 04:37:25 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  This is all true to academics, but popular (0+ / 0-)

      language evolves.  Words change meanings over time.  For most, "anarchy" has changed its meaning.  This doesn't mean that the old (19th century?) meanings were wrong, only that they communicate poorly.

      Using archaic definitions of words can be interesting and educational but maybe not so useful beyond that.  

      •  The terms have been used (0+ / 0-)

        widely in contemporary literature. It is the capitalist press and the right wing who are supplying you with the changed meaning, which you lap up rather willingly.

        I understand that many have been unintentionally misinformed, and thus I'm trying to be polite, but your comment is willfully misinformed and rather smug.

        "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

        by ZhenRen on Sun May 12, 2013 at 12:46:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Meant to say... (0+ / 0-)

          the terms have been widely and accurately used in modern literature. In Europe, the terms are generally still used as they always have been.

          It's mostly in dumbed down and extremely capitalistic America that the terms have been corrupted.

          Thus, the usage is not at all archaic. The right wing is doing what they always do: Use Orwellian language to confuse people, and it seems they have largely succeeded, to the point that "liberals" have joined them.

          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

          by ZhenRen on Sun May 12, 2013 at 12:54:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  These issues have been long discussed (0+ / 0-)

      before you came along.

      What I have described isn't representative, because the delegates in such a system are subject to definite mandates from the community, and the delegates are easily and immediately recallable and replaceable if they vary from the mandates. All is conducted with complete transparency, and there are no backrooms with cigar smoke where decisions are made.

      The mandates and delegates all flow from the bottom up. Delegates have no authority of their own, no autonomy to do what they please, no decision making ability beyond the mandates from below.

      Thus, they don't "represent" in the sense of being elected to a term of years in which they can dictate law from on high in an insular, centralized, ruling base of authority.

      "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

      by ZhenRen on Sun May 12, 2013 at 12:51:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site