Jan Steinman wrote:
>> On 22/07/2007, at 6:12 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
>>
>>> ... oil and car companies can turn me into a bomb-throwing anarchist...
>>>
>> From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Damn it, I'm sick and tired of all these misconceptions and bad press
>> concerning anarchism.
>>
I seem to recall that historically there have indeed been quite a number
of bombers who self identified as anarchists. That they were not by your
definition doesn't mean they weren't from their perspective. Perhaps
there are many different sects of anarchism, as there are with all other
isms.So it would appear that you may be inviting us to join sides in an
internal debate? Perhaps, as so often with such differences, less about
ends than means?
>
> I agree. Politicians and vernacular usage tend to define "anarchy" as
> "lawlessness." But it also means "freedom from government."
>
Taking no position pro or con on anarchism here. Aren't those two
definitions tautologically identical, but approached from different
viewpoints?
Is it not true that there is no government without law and no law
without government? I've sort of thought that, whatever its notional or
real purpose, the way government actually exists and acts is by passing
and enforcing laws. If unable to enforce their laws, any group is then
not a government, whatever they may say they are.
Just a little Moose pedantry. :-)
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|