Search Tags:

Categories:

Anarchy Discuss



Uploaded by: cozmikzen
Video Description:
I,Anarchy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KECcfKViog
Anomie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvMeB4R-CcQ


Tags for this video: anarchy atheism democracy elections enlightenment freedom liberatarian mccain obama paul politics reality ron truth

Find more videos in the "Education" category
See more videos uploaded by cozmikzen

Related Videos
ANARCHY HOW?ATHEIST ANGER!!!An Anarchists Response
anarchy-how.htmlanarchy-how.htmlanarchy-how.html
Black MassWhy Religion is DangerousSuperiority
anarchy-how.htmlanarchy-how.htmlanarchy-how.html


Share This Video:       StumbleUpon       del.icio.us       Reddit       digg       Furl       Spurl       Simpy       YahooMyWeb


Comments for this video: Show || Hide
Comments for this video on YouTube
er, I mean, as some ... ( 3 months ago by Irtidad)
er, I mean, as some Anarchists annoyingly argue against.
ok, there is no ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
ok, there is no doubt you know shitloads about anarchy. thats awesome. if it helps to better define my position: i would consider myself an anarchist as much as i would consider myself an atheist. these are terms defining an abscence of something else. i would consider myself an anti-theist, most likely an antiarchist, but those are just more labels. when it comes down to it, i'm an aist. progressive innature, not limited by terms. Aist!
lol "aist." I like! ... ( 3 months ago by Irtidad)
lol "aist." I like! See, I don't happen to believe that anarchism is strictly a negative label. I understand that many people including yourself do think of it that way, but I much prefer the classical understanding (putting it within the field of Libertarian Socialism); it seems much clearer to me. This is, however, really an issue of semantics rather than of substance.
i dont have a ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
i dont have a negative view of anarchy...i'm the one who made the video.
Speaking of atheism ... ( 3 months ago by Irtidad)
Speaking of atheism, have you heard of ignosticism (not agnosticism) a.k.a. theological noncognitivism? I find that position infinitely more intellectually satisfying than atheism, even though the difference is more of approach than of conclusion. (Atheism is more grounded in science, while theological noncognitivism is more grounded in philosophy).
Oh I mean "negative ... ( 3 months ago by Irtidad)
Oh I mean "negative" in the sense of negating something rather than making a positive assertion. Sorry, bad choice of words.
i would consider ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
i would consider myself a philosopher, and i'm partial to science. science doesnt explain everything. ive never heard of ignosticisim, sounds interesting.
I'll explain it as ... ( 3 months ago by Irtidad)
I'll explain it as best as I can in 1 comment. All positions on God revolve around the statement "God exists." Theism says it's a true statement, atheism says it's an untrue statement, agnosticism says it can't be determined, and ignosticism says it doesn't make any sense.
What i think: being ... ( 3 months ago by SlaughterAnimal)
What i think: being able to defend ones own freedom is susbscribing to your own defence (not an agency) individual desire to defend the people you associate with (not an agency) teaching people self defence, all this would be a recepie for social defence without contract.
No greater good ... ( 3 months ago by SlaughterAnimal)
No greater good necessary, you are already living by the standard of voluntaraly associating, even if the society you live in is abitrary rule. It's not anarchy people have to try, people have to try living by their own statndards and ideas. OMG if my cat died i would die! do you see what your doing, in the absense of abitrary rule we have to rely on our own jugdement and notions of right and wrong. if you believe what you say, you would be what you say despite the law.
My GOD!!! (not ... ( 3 months ago by TheBigHo111)
My GOD!!! (not really) I never knew I was an anarchist. Great vid, man. I've watched many anarchy vids but this one sent me over the top. You stated a bunch of beliefs that I have. As a matter of fact I don't believe I can disagree with anything you said. I do not through these words out there lightly, so I hope you can appreciate them. I'll watch the other vids.
Thanks AzraelsJudgement for sending it to me.
very kool, thank ya ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
very kool, thank ya!!
I don't know much ... ( 3 months ago by MobileMediaProducts)
I don't know much about anarchy, so don't slam me for my admitted stupidity, but I don't think we/people give our governments the right to commit moral acts. Instead, they take away our right to participate in what becomes their government, and THEN they commit immoral acts (supposedly) in our names. Where we fail is we continue to allow them to represent us immorally, but, this is often because they have the weapons to harm us, and we don't. Would you agree? Marius
oh definitely. ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
oh definitely. thats why we are supposed to have the right to bear arms, but..then, if you protect yourself from the govt aka cops, its automatic death penalty. now, im a pacifist, i dont want anyone to die. but there is no denying the fuckedupness of the situation. and voting is not much of a choice either. either way you vote, they still hold the monoply of power of us.
It seems to me that ... ( 3 months ago by simonodell)
It seems to me that small groups of people would soon start waging wars each other.. many are on the verge of such behaviour anyway.. turf wars, gang wars, religious intolerance etc etc. If you suddenly removed the restraining factors without solving the underlying problems of prejudice and hatred, what you will end up with is tribal warfare at every level, I can imagine trenches and machine gun nests around every major city to keep out raiders. Plz dont suggest im programmed to think this way.
there would need to ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
there would need to be a rise in the social consciousnesses of anarchy, ethics and morals before the govt would be disassembled. you r correct, if the govt fell,it would be an anomie. check out the links, it talks about this. u will like it.
Its a slow process, ... ( 3 months ago by simonodell)
Its a slow process, and I think an internet/web cam based political system would be an important step along the path. First we fix democracy by doing away with salaried politicians, and then there might be hope for the ideas your expressing. Infact, a system of volutary web politics might do away with the reasons why you would want a non-government system in the first place.
i definitely ... ( 3 months ago by cozmikzen)
i definitely believe web based politic will be the first step in self-representation. also, a tool to educate the masses.
Nice video, dude. ( 2 months ago by lukeev)
Nice video, dude.
"all evil, on all ... ( 2 months ago by junior00bacon00chee)
"all evil, on all levels, is ignorance."
couldnt agree more. ignorance is the root of all evil. yeah, war is the direct result of artificial state borders, state paranoia, etc. theres no need for armies in the absence of borders and nationalism. great video. thanks for the response.
Hmmmm...I'm not ... ( 1 week ago by Sigil23)
Hmmmm...I'm not sure I can agree with you about the teaching of morality, etc. Isn't there an unbalanced power relation that exists between teacher and pupil? But such are the problems with anarchism, the realization of which attracted me to so-called "post-anarchism." Anarchism has historically had a frankly naive understanding of the "ruled" class as being *essentially* good, without any interpersonal power structures that could themselves be unjustified -- or, for that matter, productive!
well, im not a ... ( 1 week ago by cozmikzen)
well, im not a conventional anarchgist. i understand the need for societal infrastructure.
i dont know what u mean about not wanting to teachmorality, to me that is what we have now, and why no one has decent morals and understandings.
Well, at the risk ... ( 1 week ago by Sigil23)
Well, at the risk of coming across as a relativist, I suppose the question would be: whose morality, ethics, etc.? One could say, "the morality that comes from reason," or, like Kant did, assume that morality and reason are inseparable. But this is a problematic position to take (but what position isn't?), and its success hinges on whether or not people are actually rational, and there's plenty of evidence to indicate that we are, at *best*, inconsistently rational in our decision-making.
The idea that " ... ( 6 days ago by Sigil23)
The idea that "morality is relative" is ITSELF relative within the framework of relativism. I think it's an attractive position, but I have to bite too many bullets to hold it. Plus, if morality IS relative, how could we educate people as to what's right and wrong if the terms don't refer to anything absolute? And what do you mean by "the principle of life?" Also, I take issue with your implying that philosophers think they are experts. I feel dumber every day. (Seriously, I do. Much.)



Tell a friend:


URL 
Embed Code