🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <bCo4o.640$Sp1.202@newsreading01.news.tds.net>,
 Grizzly <NoOne@nowhere.com> wrote:

> > 
> > 
> > Is it? Weakling "A" thinks that the village water supply belongs to 
> > everybody in common. Strongman "B" thinks that the well should belong to 
> > him, and has the power to deny water to everybody else. There is no 
> > government to judge who is right and to force the outcome of their 
> > decision. Both are operating under the libertarian concept.
> > 
> > It is rule of the strongest, anarchy.
> > 
> 
> No it is not anarchy in the purist sense of the word.  What you describe 
> is totalitarianism. Anarchists contrary to the image put forth by our 
> current government tend to be a peaceable group of folks who go by their 
> own moral code, and tend to disregard laws as written by group think. If 
> it is a just law in their opinion they would follow it whether it were 
> written down or not as it jibed with their own sense of what is morally 
> right. If it is an unjust law, they will disregard it and take whatever 
> consequences for disobeying it come their way pretty much in stride. 
> I've known a few quakers who are anarchists in those terms. Strongman B 
> getting over on weakling A is nothing more than a petty dictator forcing 
> his will upon another. He may find himself up against an angry mob of 
> thirsty weaklings eventually, and then his dictatorial status over the 
> well will change through sheer force of numbers.

FOr anarchy to work there needs to be a sense of cooperation and and 
mutual respect.
-- 
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the 
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html