RE: In Response to Shayne's Post - A Tale Of Two SteemIts.
See, you are still buying into your miseducation.
Dont feel bad, i first peeked out of my box in '85 as a young private in Frankfurt.
It was a circle A on a wall that led me here.
I didnt really understand until i had time to read the books, either.
Im not some young punk that just wants to run amok in the streets to act out against my daddy spanking me.
Neither are the actual anarchists that have given their lives, and of their lives, to try to secure your freedom for you.
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-prison-memoirs-of-an-anarchist
They deserve you taking the time to find out why their histories have been intentionally omitted from your indoctrination as a good little true belieber in crapitalism.
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia
I told you you're "right". Local governance and limited "government" works.
Do you consider Irwin Schiff to be an "anarchist".
Does he call himself an anarchist?
I think he called himself a Patriot.
Can you even give me one concrete example of a group of humans or even pack animals that did not have some sort of governance or leadership?
Do you know why humans and most pack animals have governance/leadership?
See, here we are debating your misconceptions, again.
Learn what anarchism is, has always been, and will continue to be by reading what anarchists wrote, not what bankster hucksters wrote about it, ok?
Group endeavors require coordination, anarchists have means of facilitating that.
If Schiff didnt self id as one, then he probably wasnt.
Most likely he was a victim of the propoganda, too.
You have been intentionally misled about anarchism and its tenets, i keep telling you that.
Ive led you to the water, it is up to you to drink it.
Put down the koolaid and read the history, eh?
What is your definition of anarchy? If you define it as limited local government then maybe I am an anarchist. lol
If your local govt rules by force it is not anarchy.
Anarchy is largely defined by its absence of coercive force.
People are free to disagree and are not forced to participate.
If i can opt out of your govt then it may be acceptable.
If you would read those links you might find that you are an anarchist.
This is a short story that hits the highlights.
http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php
I support forcefully arresting murderers. I guess I'm not an anarchist.
Anybody using violence to control others will be stopped by whatever means are necessary.
Under govt you get a lawyer to beg a judge to stop a polluter, in anarchy you drag the sumbitch into the streets and highly recommend that he stop polluting.
In mexico crime is nearly nonexistent because bad people get hurt and nobody cares, but harm a good person and they riot in the streets.
There are people here that look for bad people so they can harm someone with no consequences.
But then mexico had an anarchst led revolution in 1910.
It was downhill from there, but the hill is large enough that freedom is still readily available.
Cops travel in heavily armed packs because the people attack them, and rightfully so.
Thievin' bastards.
Does your govt collect taxes, or is it supported voluntarily?