Christian Bands?

[Alkaline]

So you want me to ignore all the hatred and killing religion has caused?

Oh thats ok lets all forget what really is going on' date=' lets all be ignorant bastards, go home and eat our dinners like nothing has ever happened. Hey you i wont lie down to this shit, i wont forget and be like the alot of those ignorant fuckers on this piece of shit planet.[/quote']

Fuck off mate. I've got no idea who you are, but i'd like to see you say that to my face. If you even knew me you'd know i was trying to stop you from making yourself look stupid, it looks like thats too late now. I'm neither ignorant or oblivious to the shit that goes on around me.

In fact, its pricks like you that rile me up so much. Shit stirrers and idiots always piss me off. At least back up your inane rants with some sort of basic common sense.

Grow up.

[Larsen B]

So you want me to ignore all the hatred and killing religion has caused?

Oh thats ok lets all forget what really is going on' date=' lets all be ignorant bastards, go home and eat our dinners like nothing has ever happened. Hey you i wont lie down to this shit, i wont forget and be like the alot of those ignorant fuckers on this piece of shit planet.[/quote']

Could you please be more specific about what killing has been caused by religion? And could you please quote the holy texts or religious leaders who have commended such behaviour? Cheers.

[soundian]

Could you please be more specific about what killing has been caused by religion? And could you please quote the holy texts or religious leaders who have commended such behaviour? Cheers.

Mmm... let's see.

The Crusades.

The ongoing struggle between protestants and catholics in NI

Mass slaughter of Jews at various times in history.

Balkans genocides.

*

You can find your own holy texts and quotes from religious leaders.

I don't think it'll be particularly difficult.

*feel free to add your religious genocide of choice to the list

[Larsen B]

I think you'll find that none of those problems can be attributed to the faiths themselves. I as have already stated numerous times this is people corrupting religion not the other way round. And don't see why i should let these sick people affect my faith.

[soundian]

I think you'll find that none of those problems can be attributed to the faiths themselves. I as have already stated numerous times this is people corrupting religion not the other way round. And don't see why i should let these sick people affect my faith.

So the crusades were NOT about religion. Fuck me. Those history books are reallly biased.

What about Hitler, you're trying to say Judaism wasn't a factor in the death of millions?

[Stripey]

People will get together and do it? I didn't say that' date=' so what's with the quotation marks? Go look again. I said, that if anarchism is to prove a workable solution, and people wish it to succeed, then it is to their benefit to make it succeed. And so, people will indeed pull together, and no, will not shirk important work.

And no, by people taking control of their own lives, this does not demonstrate selfishness. They wish, with direct control of their lives, to make a better world - for everyone.

And regarding the use of law - go see my first point.[/quote']

I think you have an incredibly naive understanding of the nature of the human species. The anarchist movement that you are so into, and all these other minority movements FAIL, because the fact of the matter is that it is an inalienable freedom of individual humans to DOMINATE, and that is exactly what is happening now in our western societies on a grand scale. You cannot ignore the parallels with darwinian evolutionary theories. Evolution takes no prisoners, it's all about playing to win.

Now, personally, I believe that when consciousness developed in human beings, darwinian evolution reached a veritable fork in the road. Humans transcend physical evolution, and introduce a new factor, consciousness.

Yes, we have the ability to make conscious decisions, but the darwinian principle of survival of the fittest still applies on that level. You cannot opt out, you cannot say "hey guys this isnt fair", because you will be crushed. If you want to win, you have to play the game.

In short, what I'm saying is that social ideologies are subject to traditional darwinian evolutionary principles, and like it or not, the guys who are playing hardball are winning, because they have an effective strategy.

Why fight for an idea which is already dead beyond salvation? Physical evolution occurs over thousands of years, political concepts evolve over decades in the human consciousness. It is pathetic to cling to political paradigms developed some 40 years ago, and you do this with an almost nostalgic, yet stoic, fervour.Times have changed, we aren't living in the 70's anymore. There will be no anarchist revolution in the west, the ideas you espouse are outmoded and irrelevant in the 21st century. It's time for a new approach.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I think you have an incredibly naive understanding of the nature of the human species. The anarchist movement that you are so into' date=' and all these other minority movements FAIL, because the fact of the matter is that it is an inalienable freedom of individual humans to DOMINATE, and that is exactly what is happening now in our western societies on a grand scale. You cannot ignore the parallels with darwinian evolutionary theories. Evolution takes no prisoners, it's all about playing to win.

Now, personally, I believe that when consciousness developed in human beings, darwinian evolution reached a veritable fork in the road. Humans transcend physical evolution, and introduce a new factor, consciousness.

Yes, we have the ability to make conscious decisions, but the darwinian principle of survival of the fittest still applies on that level. You cannot opt out, you cannot say "hey guys this isnt fair", because you will be crushed. If you want to win, you have to play the game.

In short, what I'm saying is that social ideologies are subject to traditional darwinian evolutionary principles, and like it or not, the guys who are playing hardball are winning, because they have an effective strategy.

Why fight for an idea which is already dead beyond salvation? Physical evolution occurs over thousands of years, political concepts evolve over decades in the human consciousness. It is pathetic to cling to political paradigms developed some 40 years ago, and you do this with an almost nostalgic, yet stoic, fervour.Times have changed, we aren't living in the 70's anymore. There will be no anarchist revolution in the west, the ideas you espouse are outmoded and irrelevant in the 21st century. It's time for a new approach.[/quote']

Naive? Not at all.

Okay, let me set you straight on a few matters.

Darwinian's theory on evolution? You are quite mistaken in thinking that a species success -that is their ability to thrive, is determined by competition - species pitted against each other. In fact, what we find if we look closer is that co-operation is the most important factor in considering a species success. Suggest you pick up a copy of Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. Darwin was mistaken in his choice of words.

And can I also say that I find your words rather chilling - how you have sought to demonstrate your support of the theory that might is right. It is the arguement of fascists, used to excuse the use of genocide - to persecute and ultimately eradicate those believed inferior.

And I'm sorry, but you are quite wrong in believing that anarchist thinking is but a few decades old. It is several centuries old. Some say much older. And can I say that these supposed outmoded ideas have won considerable support in recent years. Witness the growth of the anti-capitalist movement.

So irrelevant in the 21st century? I don't believe so. If anything, it is now far more relevant than ever. Do you believe it correct that we do nothing - that we sit on our hands while others who seek only profit destroy this world in which we live? Say, hey, what can we do?

.

[lepeep]

I fear we are close to the "I've wasted enough time on this thread *shakes head* post...

Like Mr Colins, "I can feel it, coming in the air tonight"....

ho ho...

[Guest allsystemsfail]

You're right. Don't think there's much else that can be said, though gridlock's post did raise some new points that I felt should be addressed.

[lepeep]

remember, give him a listen...

"thy shalt not covet anything of they neighbours"

(unless it;s oil, and you country depends on it..)

http://www.ship-of-fools.com/Gadgets/New/142.html

PS, you want Irony, check the link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4100265.stm

[Doc]

Naive? Not at all.

Okay' date=' let me set you straight on a few matters.

Darwinian's theory on evolution? You are quite mistaken in thinking that a species success -that is their ability to thrive, is determined by competition - species pitted against each other. In fact, what we find if we look closer is that co-operation is the most important factor in considering a species success. Suggest you pick up a copy of Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. Darwin was mistaken in his choice of words.

And can I also say that I find your words rather chilling - how you have sought to demonstrate your support of the theory that might is right. It is the arguement of fascists, used to excuse the use of genocide - to persecute and ultimately eradicate those believed inferior.

And I'm sorry, but you are quite wrong in believing that anarchist thinking is but a few decades old. It is several centuries old. Some say much older. And can I say that these supposed outmoded ideas have won considerable support in recent years. Witness the growth of the anti-capitalist movement.

So irrelevant in the 21st century? I don't believe so. If anything, it is now far more relevant than ever. Do you believe it correct that we do nothing - that we sit on our hands while others who seek only profit destroy this world in which we live? Say, hey, what can we do?

.[/quote']

I feel faint. I find myself agreeing with you ASF! How about that then? Quite right. Very often competition has resulted in the extinction of species. Enviromental pressures are a far greater cause of evolutionary pressure than competition, although it does play a part in either a positive or negative sense. Evolutionary history has shown us that a species that learns to co-operate can better resist the negative evolutionary pressures put upon it. Altruism in particular is a fine survival tool.

I also agree that most people in the world only want to get on with their lives in peace and harmony. And while I'm agreeing with you, I will state that I would have no problem living in a society such as you describe. Where I disagree is that an anarchist society (which whatever you say is a form of goverment) would have to be worldwide and homogenous. I do not believe that anarchy could survive if another and different system existed near it. They would most likely invade us and having no real government institutions like armed forces, we'd be defenceless. Can you imagine an anarchist army? 100,000 people standing in a field discussing whether to attack or not!

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I feel faint. I find myself agreeing with you ASF! How about that then? Quite right. Very often competition has resulted in the extinction of species. Enviromental pressures are a far greater cause of evolutionary pressure than competition' date=' although it does play a part in either a positive or negative sense. Evolutionary history has shown us that a species that learns to co-operate can better resist the negative evolutionary pressures put upon it. Altruism in particular is a fine survival tool.

I also agree that most people in the world only want to get on with their lives in peace and harmony. And while I'm agreeing with you, I will state that I would have no problem living in a society such as you describe. Where I disagree is that an anarchist society (which whatever you say is a form of goverment) would have to be worldwide and homogenous. I do not believe that anarchy could survive if another and different system existed near it. They would most likely invade us and having no real government institutions like armed forces, we'd be defenceless. Can you imagine an anarchist army? 100,000 people standing in a field discussing whether to attack or not![/quote']

Someone pick me up off the floor. Just kidding.

One point. I agree, that if an anarchist alternative was made possible, it's influence would indeed need to be far reaching, across great areas. It's survival would depend on it.

Regarding the use of force - anarchists have indeed taken up arms, forming credible military forces. Take the actions of Nestor Makhno - his forces used against both the Bolsheviks and invading white armies.

And finally, can I say that I regret the rather harsh words I used yesterday. I have a temper. Not that I'm attempting to excuse my behaviour of course.

[Doc]

Someone pick me up off the floor. Just kidding.

One point. I agree' date=' that if an anarchist alternative was made possible, it's influence would indeed need to be far reaching, across great areas. It's survival would depend on it.

Regarding the use of force - anarchists have indeed taken up arms, forming credible military forces. Take the actions of Nestor Makhno - his forces used against both the Bolsheviks and invading white armies.

And finally, can I say that I regret the rather harsh words I used yesterday. I have a temper. Not that I'm attempting to excuse my behaviour of course.[/quote']

Think nothing of it. I too have a temper and these discussions often get heated-a sign of passion.

It would be wise anarchists who set aside their philosophy of no authority in order to effectively fight a war of survival against an agressor. I assume, rightly I hope, that an anarchist society would abandon territorial and imperial aggression.

[Larsen B]

So the crusades were NOT about religion. Fuck me. Those history books are reallly biased.

What about Hitler' date=' you're trying to say Judaism wasn't a factor in the death of millions?[/quote']

That's not what i said. Look at Dave M_LL said. And it's seems to me that your blaming jews for having themselves slaughtered because if they weren't jewish they wouldn't have been. You're an absolute imbecile.

[rune]

Could you please be more specific about what killing has been caused by religion? And could you please quote the holy texts or religious leaders who have commended such behaviour? Cheers.

What the fuck really, so you have no knowledge about the hatred between celtic and rangers and the people who have died due to that? Aren't the problems in ireland religion related aswell, mmmm don't you think? Then you have the problems caused from places like iraq.

[Stripey]

Naive? Not at all.

Okay' date=' let me set you straight on a few matters.

Darwinian's theory on evolution? You are quite mistaken in thinking that a species success -that is their ability to thrive, is determined by competition - species pitted against each other. In fact, what we find if we look closer is that co-operation is the most important factor in considering a species success. Suggest you pick up a copy of Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. Darwin was mistaken in his choice of words.

[/quote']

I was talking about survival of the fittest within a species, not species vs species, and I think you will find that sort of competition and domination exists within pretty much every species.

And can I also say that I find your words rather chilling - how you have sought to demonstrate your support of the theory that might is right. It is the arguement of fascists' date=' used to excuse the use of genocide - to persecute and ultimately eradicate those believed inferior.

[/quote']

sadly, those with power and the will to exercise it always dominate, it's just a fact of life.

Do you believe it correct that we do nothing - that we sit on our hands while others who seek only profit destroy this world in which we live? Say' date=' hey, what can we do?

.[/quote']

See, the people who are currently dominating, no matter if its for profit or whatever, are doing it because they can, and there will always be people willing to exercise that right.

Anarchism just will not work, because it requires everyone to adopt the same principles, and that will never happen.

I'm reminded of a guy who was in the news recently, because he climbed into a lion enclosure at a zoo and tried to convert the lions to christianity. He almost got killed. Nobody is ever going to homogenise attitudes amongst the whole human race, because of a little thing called free will. The utopia you envisage is pure fantasy and could only ever work on a tiny scale, in a vacuum.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I was talking about survival of the fittest within a species' date=' not species vs species, and I think you will find that sort of competition and domination exists within pretty much every species.

sadly, those with power and the will to exercise it always dominate, it's just a fact of life.

See, the people who are currently dominating, no matter if its for profit or whatever, are doing it because they can, and there will always be people willing to exercise that right.

Anarchism just will not work, because it requires everyone to adopt the same principles, and that will never happen.

I'm reminded of a guy who was in the news recently, because he climbed into a lion enclosure at a zoo and tried to convert the lions to christianity. He almost got killed. Nobody is ever going to homogenise attitudes amongst the whole human race, because of a little thing called free will. The utopia you envisage is pure fantasy and could only ever work on a tiny scale, in a vacuum.[/quote']

Regarding competition, I'm sorry, but your quite wrong. Consider for a moment hunting animals - those who hunt in number. The success of the hunt, and so the species, is determined by co-operation. And what of other more complex animal systems? What of bees? Ants?

People in times of extreme crisis have demonstrated great selflessness, compassion - in times of war for example. The are not entirely selfish as you believe, but can indeed (for the common good) pull together.

And genocide a fact of life, and so we must accept it? The holocaust was but a fact of life? I'm stunned.

And yes, I agree, as I have said so already, anarchism if viable would indeed need the greater mass of people to agree with its principles. I did not say otherwise. I gotta say that I find your attitude defeatist. If everyone thought as you do, no action would be taken at all.

And can I also say that anarchists do not adhere to a single belief. There are many variants. Many ideas. No blueprint exists - what an anarchist society may look like. We ain't socialists.

You believe my ideas pure fantasy only because you will not allow yourself to look beyond what we've been told - been instructed what is correct, and so should be accepted without question.

[GraemeC]

I gotta say that I find your attitude defeatist. If everyone thought as you do' date=' no action would be taken at all.[/quote']

But most people think like that because they dont want anarchy....is that difficult for you to grasp?

Its like any other form of extreme thinking, its sounds great (to some) in theory but is unworkable in practise.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

But most people think like that because they dont want anarchy....is that difficult for you to grasp?

Its like any other form of extreme thinking' date=' its sounds great (to some) in theory but is unworkable in practise.[/quote']

Most are not even aware of an alternative. They are taught from a very young age, that if society is to function, then we cannot do without government, the state. Any view contrary to this is rejected - believe unacceptable. The state will not permit it.

And as I've shown, anarchism's practice has indeed proven it a workable solution.

[lepeep]

(this sounds harsh, but I don't mean it like the way it sounds...)

then why not MOVE to that place ? where like minded people like you can exsist in harmony ?

or is it your mission to convert us all ? (yeah, yeah, I know, I remember your PM).

"conversion" is not what you want...

[Guest allsystemsfail]

(this sounds harsh' date=' but I don't mean it like the way it sounds...)

then why not MOVE to that place ? where like minded people like you can exsist in harmony ?

or is it your mission to convert us all ? (yeah, yeah, I know, I remember your PM).

"conversion" is not what you want...[/quote']

Creating pockets where people can be free, while important in providing an example of other ways of living, is of little real threat to the established order. We still gotta take action - seek to challenge those who think only of profit, of power, of domination.

[GraemeC]

Creating pockets where people can be free' date=' while important in providing an example of other ways of living, is of little real threat to the established order. We still gotta take action - seek to challenge those who think only of profit, of power, of domination.[/quote']

So who decides what action is to be taken where and when?

[Stripey]

Regarding competition' date=' I'm sorry, but your quite wrong.

[/quote']

and then you go on to say...

We still gotta take action - seek to challenge those who think only of profit' date=' of power, of domination.[/quote']

See, you understand afterall! It is all about competition and domination of ideologies. All you want to do is depose the existing dominating power, and replace it with your own, which isn't gonna happen because anarchism is weaker.

[Larsen B]

What the fuck really' date=' so you have no knowledge about the hatred between celtic and rangers and the people who have died due to that? Aren't the problems in ireland religion related aswell, mmmm don't you think? Then you have the problems caused from places like iraq.[/quote']

Good lord!!!!! You are stoopid! Read post 106.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

and then you go on to say...

See' date=' you understand afterall! It is all about competition and domination of ideologies. All you want to do is depose the existing dominating power, and replace it with your own, which isn't gonna happen because anarchism is weaker.[/quote']

You really don't get it do you? Anarchists do not seek domination, but freedom, social justice. We have no interest in replacing one controlling order with another. By taking action, we do so in self defence. If you're gonna attack what you believe anarchism's weaknesses, then I suggest first that you actually find out about the subject.

And I have to say that I've found it quite interesting how you have selected only the arguements that you felt you could address.