Comment Re:Just a naive hemp-shirt-wearing college idiot.. (Score 1) 2549
I really don't strongly feel the need to respond to this... but nevertheless....
"The reason I think these theories tend to be so popular(relatively speaking) with the youth is that they can only exist when there is an ignorance about basic aspects of human nature."
I would disagree with this... I would say that "The reason I think these theories (i.e., ones which advocate authority) tend to be so popular (relatively speaking) with aggressive and fearful personalities, is that they can only exist when there is an ignorance about the basic aspects of human nature". Now I would agree that human nature is not inherently "good", but I would also add that human nature is not inherently "bad" either, as the human psyche does not function in terms of what is "good" or "bad". Human being have real motives for what they do. George Bush, Osama Bin Laden, local neighborhood theives and thugs, social reformers, charity workers, revolutionaries, etc, all have their own personal drives and motives for doing what they do. Osama Bin Laden is not a terrorist because he is just a "bad" person, but because he has, what is basically, the fascist mindset (i.e., one which is both reactionary (and, therefore authoritarian) and rebellious). He sees a military/financial power oppressing "his" people, so he, like the pro-War americans, wants to bring the US to it's knees in submission. The reason why revolution by the oppressed people is possible, is not because it is the "good" people who are oppressed, but because they are not in positions of power, and therefore have the capacity for creative disobedience. I agree that the world is "full of wonderfully architected social theories and most of them fail under the stress of human behaviour", and therefore, I think it is necessary, that any revolution must not be based on the ideology of a vanduard elite, but must spring naturally from the frustration of an oppressed people. Actually, "anarchy" is a social structure, but it is not one which is architected. It is whatever social structure which is created by people who refuse to submit to repression. And "the authoritarians" do come in and attempt to "send you back to work". It has happened in history a number of times. And maybe destructive barbarism will defeat humanity once and for all... But that shouldn't stop people from resisting it.
"The reason I think these theories tend to be so popular(relatively speaking) with the youth is that they can only exist when there is an ignorance about basic aspects of human nature."
I would disagree with this... I would say that "The reason I think these theories (i.e., ones which advocate authority) tend to be so popular (relatively speaking) with aggressive and fearful personalities, is that they can only exist when there is an ignorance about the basic aspects of human nature". Now I would agree that human nature is not inherently "good", but I would also add that human nature is not inherently "bad" either, as the human psyche does not function in terms of what is "good" or "bad". Human being have real motives for what they do. George Bush, Osama Bin Laden, local neighborhood theives and thugs, social reformers, charity workers, revolutionaries, etc, all have their own personal drives and motives for doing what they do. Osama Bin Laden is not a terrorist because he is just a "bad" person, but because he has, what is basically, the fascist mindset (i.e., one which is both reactionary (and, therefore authoritarian) and rebellious). He sees a military/financial power oppressing "his" people, so he, like the pro-War americans, wants to bring the US to it's knees in submission. The reason why revolution by the oppressed people is possible, is not because it is the "good" people who are oppressed, but because they are not in positions of power, and therefore have the capacity for creative disobedience. I agree that the world is "full of wonderfully architected social theories and most of them fail under the stress of human behaviour", and therefore, I think it is necessary, that any revolution must not be based on the ideology of a vanduard elite, but must spring naturally from the frustration of an oppressed people. Actually, "anarchy" is a social structure, but it is not one which is architected. It is whatever social structure which is created by people who refuse to submit to repression. And "the authoritarians" do come in and attempt to "send you back to work". It has happened in history a number of times. And maybe destructive barbarism will defeat humanity once and for all... But that shouldn't stop people from resisting it.
