Yeah, and what happens when a few anarchists meet and start talking?
What happens is a noisy argument about which of them will be the boss anarchist.
(After I'd been doing politics for ten years, a college-age intern in a political campaign office told me he was an anarchist. Instead of quizzing him, I waited. He revealed himself to be the bossiest intern I'd ever seen. He inspired what I said above.)
It's an oxymoron and a bizarrerie, which is in the OED.
This should be a self correcting non-political system. When I read your post, I imaged the anarchist voting off the least anarchic (is that even a word?) of the group until only one was left. Rinse and repeat.
"Anarchic" is indeed a word, and if it isn't you're to be congratulated for coming up with it.
In the OED and the NOAD (New Oxford American D.) - with no controlling rules or principles to give order.
Also anarchical and anarchically.
If democracy is to survive we will have to devise technologically superior means of choosing our leaders. If there were, say, a means of formulating issues and voting on them directly from our computers (or government-designated computer voting centers with touch screens and very simplified instructions, with savvy people on the premises) we could from our own homes direct that this money be spent on solar; that money on infrastructure. We could de-fund much of defense and put it into non-hydrocarbonaceous energy development. And in the meantime, we can stop all this voter fraud nonsense and have meritocratic elections, publicly funded, with limits on spending and acceptance of campaign monies from outside sources a criminal offense.
James, if our democracy is to survive, long before we implement any enhanced means of choosing our leaders, we have to do some serious work on the people who choose them. We need to wean them off of Oprah and Alex Jones and reacquaint them with a government that might work for them if they bothered to take a more active role in that business. We need people who care to be educated on the issues rather than responding with a knee-jerk every time another crisis flashes across their TV screens. We need people who are willing to hold their representatives accountable, giving both positive and negative feedback, and voting them out when they fail to serve the interests of those who elected them.
In short, we need people who are engaged and are part of the process. Otherwise, those with the agendas will run the show and we will end up paying for it.
> Otherwise, those with the agendas will run the show and we will end up paying for it.
Not sure the future tense is appropriate here.
Sadly agreed, Bertold.
In short, we need people who are engaged and are part of the process.
I think the only people who are like that are immigrants....new citizens. People whose families have been here for more than 100 years seem to feel entitled to boss everyone else around, or they don't give a sh*t about anything but making more money than they could ever possibly use. Or bass fishing.
The church van in front of the adult bookstore. I knew it the entire time but they wouldn't listen to me. It was in the daze of the holyroller church disabling your TV set so you could not watch worldly and sinful over the air programs. Of course, the TV would still play rented or purchased videos just fine if you had a VCR.
Are you a hypocrite? Of course. I have taken the hippocratic oath. Maybe that's hipocritic oath.