Taoist Anarchy Organization

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Edited March 7, 2012 by Hot Nirvana Judo Trend

[Protector]

Meh...

 

Sounds like a work on a new political party system... thing

 

There are already many parties, around here at least, running for being in charge and some of them work just fine. In computer terms, these parties are more like programs running on an operational system that unlike the programs, never seems to change. There are a lot of updates though and these parties are like updates that change the OS a little while they're in charge.

 

I don't think the party is where that Anarchy happens, parties have rules and principles and things that define them. Anarchy is on the same level as chaos and just allowing things to happen. The parliament is where the actual Anarchy happens, it's the OS that runs other parties and it changes and allows a party in charge to do it's thing.

 

I'm more interested in making a better OS and giving all parties a better chance. The OS, even when it's told what's wrong, doesn't know the best possible thing to do at any situation. That's a flaw that needs to be fixed if possible, and it looks like a thing that needs a Taoist to solve.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

That's teh thing. it's not a political party, just a bunch of word-of-mount people with no leaders or presidents or "heads of", just people. the closest thing to a leader is a person with a good example, which has no reason to be followed except by individual discretion. Unlike a program in an OS, this is a collective of users... to borrow from your analogy.

 

 

This isnt about establishing rules and regulations, just encouraging people to knowingly work together, as in an organization, but without all the walls and fences and barriers that an organization is typically defined by.

 

overall, this seems to be the best bet for designing something new, by working together, largely by word of mouth. what easier way to establish an initial change than by word of mouth? What better tool than the internet?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why argue that we need to be the ones, individually, to make changes? Where else are you/we going to go? Any place better than here at the tao bums? Anything?

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I like the idea of informing Anarchism with Taoist theory. They are not one and the same thing, but Anarchism can definitely be carried out in way that is informed by Taoism.

 

 

For example, the yin-yang symbol can be looked at from the perspective of order or structure and freedom. Both structure and freedom have an element of the other within each. So Anarchism allows for structure that is open and flexible according to the needs of individual situations. Also freedom is free, but there is a recognized order which is respected by all participants who maintain that order in order to maintain their freedom.

 

So both freedom and structure/order need to be tolerant of each other in order for each to enjoy this mutually perpetuating relationship and influence.

 

Keeping in mind the focus is harmonious freedom which does not fall out of harmony with Tao and necessitate extraneous implementations.

[Protector]

That's how things work right now with the whole conspiracy theory front.

 

First someone got the information and gave it to the people, the people then think they can make a difference by telling other people, in the end everyone knows what's going on, but that's it. No one takes initiative in anything while getting ready to take the next big hit in case it ever happens. Meanwhile a very organized system of meany-bad-bad people keeps going at it but this time in the open.

 

There's just a big mass of people with nothing to do because when it all started no one said, "This is what happening and this is what we're gotta do." No one knows what to do with the information and so it just gets passed along hoping there is someone who knows what to do with it. This whole mass of people is left there without a leader but it's still controlled with fear that is created by someone from the outside. Everyone is being controlled by what they're trying to fight and this is the weak spot of this not-system.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

to quote myself:

 

 

 

My first piece to contribute:

 

 

"isnt anarchy the lack of organization; chaos?"

 

Not necessarily, it CAN be organized, as a communal effort where every man and woman is the only authority over themselves, and collaborate via suggestion, reccomendation, and reputation/influence.no enforcement of anything except, perhaps, self defense.which is STILL a matter of self governance

 

 

 

 

 

 

The whole point being this is a necessary change in social function that we are in need of. maybe that is only my opinion, but i have to word it in such a strong way to deliver my point effectively. We need to break free of old and outdated forms of organization with strict, rigid, and controlling boundaries, we need to form a new "for the people, by the people" way of life. one that is LITERALLY for and by the people, us. the little guys and gals. something which becomes highly organized only provides further distinction and separation between for the people, and "by the people elected to do it for us"...

[Aetherous]

What is this organization going to do? What is its mission statement? How will it benefit the members?

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

By organizing anarchy, people will be better equipped with the tools and networking to break free from organized heirchies and governing bodies.

 

I'll think of a statement, or better yet, we will, as things get moving along. better a group participation.

 

A work in progress is:

 

"Organized communal anarchy for interdependence among individuals and independence of communities."

 

The benefits are in the contributions... More people who contribute suggestions and ideas for improving a person's independence is interdependence in and of itself, the results come down to the participation and utilization of what others can offer.

 

 

SOME might be able to offer material assistance like a place to stay or food, others might be able to offer means of maintaining these things with minimal maintainence.

 

The benefits are in the interdependence. if we help each other help each other and ourselves, everybody benefits.

[Protector]

What will motivate them to do that?

[Jeramiah Zeitigeist]

This is the PGA statement, which I have saved and used a few times over the years, as a basis for good anarchist discussion. I like it, as starting point....

 

PGA Hallmark

 

HALLMARKS:

 

A very clear rejection of capitalism, imperialism and feudalism; all trade agreements, institutions and governments that promote destructive globalisation;

 

We reject all forms and systems of domination and discrimination including, but not limited to, patriarchy, racism and religious fundamentalism of all creeds. We embrace the full dignity of all human beings.

 

A confrontational attitude, since we do not think that lobbying can have a major impact in such biased and undemocratic organisations, in which transnational capital is the only real policy-maker;

 

A call to direct action and civil disobedience, support for social movements' struggles, advocating forms of resistance which maximize respect for life and oppressed peoples' rights, as well as the construction of local alternatives to global capitalism;

 

An organisational philosophy based on decentralisation and autonomy.

 

 

I'd add, of course, that for me, anarchist thought doesn't include violence against the person, which is clearly oppression, so the confrontational attitude and civil disobedience is either passive, or directed at the property and tolls of the state. Not people.

[Protector]

Originally I wanted to wait for a few pages before I could say that Anarchy has too many rules

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

This is the PGA statement, which I have saved and used a few times over the years, as a basis for good anarchist discussion. I like it, as starting point....

 

PGA Hallmark

 

HALLMARKS:

 

A very clear rejection of capitalism, imperialism and feudalism; all trade agreements, institutions and governments that promote destructive globalisation;

 

We reject all forms and systems of domination and discrimination including, but not limited to, patriarchy, racism and religious fundamentalism of all creeds. We embrace the full dignity of all human beings.

 

A confrontational attitude, since we do not think that lobbying can have a major impact in such biased and undemocratic organisations, in which transnational capital is the only real policy-maker;

 

A call to direct action and civil disobedience, support for social movements' struggles, advocating forms of resistance which maximize respect for life and oppressed peoples' rights, as well as the construction of local alternatives to global capitalism;

 

An organisational philosophy based on decentralisation and autonomy.

 

 

I'd add, of course, that for me, anarchist thought doesn't include violence against the person, which is clearly oppression, so the confrontational attitude and civil disobedience is either passive, or directed at the property and tolls of the state. Not people.

 

 

eeehhhhhh..... it's all about the local consent though. if the local consent is all a-okay with racism, just as long as it's made obvious... no wrong doing... there needs to be outlets for everything, even violence.

 

But as long as they are maintained to smaller areas or "zones" people can avoid them outright. or indulge mindelessly at their own risk

[Jeramiah Zeitigeist]

Originally I wanted to wait for a few pages before I could say that Anarchy has too many rules

 

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

I like to see them more as starting points for discussion and action !

[Marblehead]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

I like to see them more as starting points for discussion and action !

 

This might actually be the only way to establish a society based on anarchy. Establish the rules, anyone violating the rules will be cast out. Eventually all who are left will be in compliant with the rules.

[Aaron]

The basic rule for an anarchist society is that the people themselves determine what happens. It doesn't mean there aren't officials or government workers, it just means that the individuals wants and desires are important and reflective of the society as a whole. In other words there would be no senate or congress, it would be like the ancient Greeks, everyone gets together to vote and they decide as a community what to do. So if you have a community with mostly Christians, then their wishes would be reflected.

 

The real danger with any society is that they attempt to enforce their wills on others, so the trick would be to find a way to enable each individual group to learn to allow others to live as they wish, regardless of their own personal wishes.

 

 

Aaron

[joeblast]

eh, some people are quick to want to ditch the republic, its easier to just let a rumor rip through a crowd and have yell be the vote on it, mob ruledemocratic-like "anarchists" are going to have a hard time reconciling the green grass on the other side with reality on this side just like Progressives.

[Aaron]

eh, some people are quick to want to ditch the republic, its easier to just let a rumor rip through a crowd and have yell be the vote on it, mob ruledemocratic-like "anarchists" are going to have a hard time reconciling the green grass on the other side with reality on this side just like Progressives.

 

This makes no sense to me. What are you actually saying here? Are you saying that people are incapable of deciding what's best for themselves, that we need people to decide that for them? If so, who decides?

 

My personal opinion is that there are a lot of idiots out there, but there are just as many decent people. If society allowed groups to exist and work together based on their own specific beliefs and mores, rather than a consensus of everyone, then what you would find is a world with very little hate and strife, one that worried more about what was happening to them, rather than how others were living their lives.

 

 

Aaron

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

This might actually be the only way to establish a society based on anarchy. Establish the rules, anyone violating the rules will be cast out. Eventually all who are left will be in compliant with the rules.

 

 

well not quite... like i said before, there needs to be a place for everyone/everything.

 

 

the people who are "cast out" of one community can, or should always be able to find another place that suits their needs or desires.

 

 

 

LA, for example, can, for all i care, be isolated and left to gangs, war, strife, and dog-eat-dog, while Portland, perhaps, could becoem a hippie haven where it's all peace, drugs, free love, and music, and way down in texas we have the more old fashioned America, but all these areas and states would have to be okay with leaving everyone to their own devices, live and let live, or live and let die

 

Small government, everywhere. Community independence, with individual and national interdependence.

 

Individuals of communities work together for the common goal, or move away to some place that meets their folley, while communities act as independent individuals, working together to maintain the intricate network of diverse communities.

 

 

The primary points are individual freedom and diversity; the pwoer to govern oneself and the diversity of "location" or communities where each person can find what he or she desires most in their self governance.

 

 

A gay community, a hippie community, an old-fashioned traditional American area, an amish area, a hindu area, all sorts of people, all sorts of places to reflect that. WE already have a lot of it, but it is all stifled by large government authority over small individual persons.

 

The first steps are to network and organize a shared and agreed on anarchy that leaves a wide open range of participants and shared resources when and wherever possible.

 

The brotherhood of mankind would help, but in the same breath, there are still people that are opposed to interdependence, and they have jsut as much right to their way of life as any communist or democratic or republic lifestyle.

 

Anarchy isnt only self-governance, but the permission of every other form of government within reason and localization. No one size fits all.

[Protector]

Nop...

 

Leaders will ruin everything

[Aetherous]

I like this: The philosophy of Liberty

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Unfortunately, in order to truly own oneself, one must be able and allowed to own the distribution of the fruits of their labors, and never be denied access to the necessary resources for life, such as clean water, healthy food, and adequate shelter and companionship.

 

 

Whome so ever restricts you of any one of these things lays a claim on your life, and if you are unable to resist their claim, you lose your self-ownership to taht degree.

 

 

 

 

Who owns themselves anymore?!

 

 

 

 

{edit:}that animation is painfully long... lol

 

 

I'd like to try to reiterate it in words for easier and faster access...

 

 

 

You own yourself, your life, and the products of your time and effort, and no person or group of persons has any right to require your time, effort, or production so that you may live, but you and you alone are responsible for yourself, though you can elect for leadership over you, this can only be of individual consent and no proclaimed official has any right to own you without your consent or others without theirs.

 

Well it's a long stretch, there's a lot mroe there than that, but still, i tend to agree with most of it, except the URL suggests illumanati...

{/edit:}

Edited February 22, 2012 by Hot Nirvana Judo Trend

[Protector]

They don't have the right but they have the ability

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

... All the more reason to organize an anarchy movement that denies them the ability to breach the rights of individual persons.

[zerostao]

I like this: The philosophy of Liberty

 

thanks for sharing this Scotty

[Jeramiah Zeitigeist]