|
V for Vendetta
|
View this Thread in Original format
| NeoPhono |
I posted in the Chill Out Room considering the movie, but I thought I'd post in here about the message behind the movie. I don't know who has seen it, but I read the original graphic novel over ten years ago, and loved it from the start. It was my first taste of non-traditional adult political thinking, and I was blown away. I saw the movie tonight, and although it differed from the comic, I was still happy with its translation to the screen.
The movie has more to do with an oppressive government following terrorism and the need to break free of its chains, whereas the book is more about striving for a state of anarchy (in this case, a good thing) in which the people no longer need leaders.
I tend to be a bit grounded when it comes to anarchy in that I believe that a downside of human nature is that a power vacuum must be filled, at any means. I would love to live in a world were altrusism truly occured and we could live without the need for a heirarchy of leaders, but I don't think that will ever happen.
Is anyone more optimistic than me? Can a peaceful anarchy ever exist? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
Can a peaceful anarchy ever exist? |
are you familiar with some of the heads in this forum? myself not included |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| I've thought about anarchy a bit and I can't see how it would be good in the progress of the human race. Things like space exploration would not be possible without large governments who collect large taxes :) . I think that you cannot have any sort of anarchy where the huge majority of people are not farmers sustaining themselves. Any other way would create a leader which would basically rule over others. We would also probably be stuck in a bartering economic state. There really has to be some sort of government with use of money. |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
I've thought about anarchy a bit and I can't see how it would be good in the progress of the human race. Things like space exploration would not be possible without large governments who collect large taxes :) . I think that you cannot have any sort of anarchy where the huge majority of people are not farmers sustaining themselves. Any other way would create a leader which would basically rule over others. We would also probably be stuck in a bartering economic state. There really has to be some sort of government with use of money. |
If an anarchy were to exist, it would have to be a utopian society. People would realize what was needed, and would do it. If more farmers were needed, then more people would allocate themselves to being farmers. When it comes to space exploration/technology, it would also be up to the people to decide to contribute to that goal, not the government to force taxation and then divert money to the programs it saw fit. You could see it as being a totally charity-driven society, where society gives money to institutions it deems fit to further serve society.
Again, we're hoping that we would be able to totally "free" ourselves from human nature, which I don't think would ever happen, but I'm playing devils advocate as to how anarchy could happen. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| quote: | | People would realize what was needed, and would do it. |
:wtf: Maybe in a small village, but we're talking about 6+ billion people at the moment. I say 6 billion because if anarchy was to work, it would have to basically be global. I can't imagine a world where there was an anarchist country next to any other country without the country invading the anarchist country(a.k.a. anarchist countries' lack of military. I don't think a pure anarchist country could have a military. Woudn't it be a form of government in some way? A hierchy of leadership...) Anyway, it would be impossible for people to contribute to what they see fit without a lot of organization, which is where a government could easily come together in one form or another.
| quote: | | If more farmers were needed, then more people would allocate themselves to being farmers |
I can't really see this EVER happening in real life. Why would people move into the countryside to farm when they could have an easier job in the city. It's kind of difficult for me to imagine. There's little motivation considering it's voluntary and you're not even sure whether or not farmers are actually needed.
The only way I can see anarchy working is in a world where everyone believes and practices it... not very hopeful |
|
|
| occrider |
One of the precepts of successful anarchy seems to be that there be seamless cooperation in society. There may be many successful examples of such societies in other creatures such as ants, bees, etc., but I don't think we've evolved in a way to exhibit similar tendencies. We exhibit cooperation, sacrifice, and selfishness but those seem to be motivated by other factors than contributing to the general collective and seem to be more infrequent with the greater the sacrifice. I think we're also in competition with ourselves to a certain degree which, to me, eliminates all possiblity of a successful anarchy.
In other words, first thing I would do would be to buy a gun. |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
One of the precepts of successful anarchy seems to be that there be seamless cooperation in society. There may be many successful examples of such societies in other creatures such as ants, bees, etc., but I don't think we've evolved in a way to exhibit similar tendencies. We exhibit cooperation, sacrifice, and selfishness but those seem to be motivated by other factors than contributing to the general collective and seem to be more infrequent with the greater the sacrifice. I think we're also in competition with ourselves to a certain degree which, to me, eliminates all possiblity of a successful anarchy.
In other words, first thing I would do would be to buy a gun. |
What if we could channel that competition to where instead of it being against one another, it would be in to who could have the biggest impact on society, in a positive manner? Of course we'd have to assume individuals wouldn't sabatoge that competition by shooting their fellow humans, but what if the energy to set yourself apart from your "neighbor" was channeled into helping society? Could the sastisfaction of knowing you have helped further society outweigh the need to distance yourself materialistically from your fellow man?
It seems to me as a libertarian that anarchy could be seen as the ultimate ends of a libertarian ideology. Does anyone else agree? |
|
|
| metalgearsolid |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
are you familiar with some of the heads in this forum? myself not included |
yea you're right with that comment. But really did you ever think that maybe a cool oppressive gov like stalin's would be cool cuz than you have superheros getting killed and just chaos that would be sweet. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
One of the precepts of successful anarchy seems to be that there be seamless cooperation in society. There may be many successful examples of such societies in other creatures such as ants, bees, etc., but I don't think we've evolved in a way to exhibit similar tendencies. We exhibit cooperation, sacrifice, and selfishness but those seem to be motivated by other factors than contributing to the general collective and seem to be more infrequent with the greater the sacrifice. I think we're also in competition with ourselves to a certain degree which, to me, eliminates all possiblity of a successful anarchy.
In other words, first thing I would do would be to buy a gun. |
Well that does argue an interesting point. Ants, bees, colonies, etc--while they do have leaders, each individual has a niche role that they play which contributes to the survival of the colony, whereas humans are largely driven by self-preservation and the need to look out for themselves. It works in a colony of bugs, but at the human level, that sort of structure would be near impossible to maintain if for no ther reason than Free Will.
Actually, those bug colonies are more like communist/socialist societies than sustainable utopian anarchies, IMHO. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
It seems to me as a libertarian that anarchy could be seen as the ultimate ends of a libertarian ideology. Does anyone else agree? |
Well yea but it would be impossible to sort out. What kind of returns should people get for their education and skillsets compared to those with less? A doctor's time is worth far more than a bricklayer. It's impossible to distance yourself from materialism based upon the nature of our work ethic which is derived from rewards and sacrifices. |
|
|
|
|
