- Re: First they came or the anarchists ... Archived Message
Posted by dereklane
on December 17, 2019, 8:27 pm, in reply to "Re: First they came or the anarchists ..."
|
I don't think anyone should be banned, but people should read the posts and consider other perspectives . I can only lead by example, nor would I tell others what to do or belittle them for it. I'm saying it's possible to hold two thoughts in your head st once. Thinking an anarchist society is the best one does not preclude opinions about societies claiming to be democratic. As such an opinion on that is fine and sensible. If you want democracy, then you must own it, not pick and choose within that paradigm. It's justifiable to cal the ge a farce, full of poor options and garnered with process so devoid of democracy in its true sense to be meaningless. On the other hand a referendum comes miles closer to the actual meaning of democracy, and yet, by and large it was rejected by people here and across the Labour Party inner sanctum, because the result was wrong. You either stand by it, defend it where you find it (democracy not the uk voting system), or reject it all. If you would have been happy to see corbyn elected, you should also have defended the referendum result. The referendum result should have been a list topper for democratic ideals (ideals within that paradigm). That it wasn't spoke volumes to me about people's true motivations (not principles but winning). No chance of an anarchist society while people are still that immature. Humility is as much a part of a functioning anarchist society as unanimity. Another example is the law system. It is upheld as a system to defend, innocent til proved guilty. A fair trial, etc. I think the machinations and the people within it mostly stink, and as everywhere serve power. But, arguing according to their proclamations of what it is for, I would uphold the closest examples of that, and denounce those that prove a travesty of justice. And I can do that without believing the hype in the first place, just accepting the principles it professes to adhere to. That is, I can have an opinion based on the professed principles of that system even though my own beliefs differ. |