this 1 site i like because it is controversial in nature which is sure to spark a fire with many . i am not in agreement with the premise as it is , but you have to have a point to start change and move forward from .
that term "panarchy" invites intellectual historians
to think of the greek splitfooted entity "Pan" whom monotheists equate with the Adversary of their religion.
if you are an anarchist, try being brave and simply saying so.
i have NEVER seen that word before in any political discussion, and it is literally reminiscent of Satanism.
and of course anarchism has had philosophies attempt to co-opt it before
most obviously through the 20th century to the current day socialism and communism -- which are fake forms of anarchist polemic.
"Panarchy?" someone could say that means to be ruled by THIS guy:
surely that was not your intention. it's what happens when you attempt to adopt ancient languages to the needs of a time centuries removed frm their original
region and context...
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:48 AM, <daniel@danmorin.com> wrote:
“I disagree, but you’re entitled to your opinion”I believe everyone is entitled his opinion, and consequently, act accordingly. Having an opinion but being forced to act otherwise is tyranny. For instance, if I oppose a war, however forced to join the military to fight that war, then I have no opinion on that war. Anyone claiming that “I am entitled to my opinion on the war”, however forcing me to fight that war is an hypocrite. Conscription is slavery; it is no different than a slave having the opinion of being free, however forced into involuntary servitude. Speaking of involuntary servitude, taxation to fund a war is also a form of slavery, because the taxpayer is denied his opinion about the war.What I disagree with the current democracy is the minority is under the tyranny of the majority. A democrat may use the rhetoric that others are entitled their opinion, however anyone opposing funding his pet projects (paying taxes), just be jailed, or killed if resisting the thugs in uniforms (aka the police - which are armed tax collectors). In short, legislation is an opinion with a gun to kill anyone who disagree. There are no better words to summarize legislation.If people truly endorse the right to choose, they should support panarchy.Panarchy is the human right to choose your government as you choose your religion. It is about the right of every human being to live in a government to which they give their consent freely and fully. It is about the right of every human being to live in a government that fully respects them as a human person.Sincerely,-- Daniel.From: WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary Shepherd
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 2:49 PM
To: WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [WorldCitizen] Re: i see / i hear ... i comprehendHiThe old definition of democracy as “rule by the masses”, or as a “tyranny of the majority” which made it a negative word back in the 18th and 19th century has largely been superseded today. Almost any government with a responsible claim to being a democracy these days would have to include basic protection of minority rights that cannot be taken away by the majority, even in cases where it is a “minority of one”. I admit the definition of words can be tricky, particularly in the political realm, and the difference between a representative (as opposed to direct) democracy and a constitutional republic can sometimes depend on who is using the terms. As I understand it, republic is a more specific term; it denotes a government with elected public officials rather than those installed by heredity (monarchy), religious authority (theocracy), a small group at the top of the social hierarchy (oligarchy) or by military power (junta). A country can be a republic, and still be rather undemocratic; in fact some of history’s worst dictators were elected to their positions. At the same time, a country can be something other than a republic (the Netherlands is an excellent example) and yet be relatively democratic.I believe democracy is a range, like temperature, rather than a specific state. Thus a government can be more democratic or less democratic, rather than being a democracy or not a democracy. Democracy is a very broad term, and applies to social decision-making systems, rather than just governments. When three guys decide to see a movie, and two of the want to see Harry Potter, and the other one wants to see Debbie Does Dallas, and they go to Harry Potter, that’s the democratic process at work. When one guy says Harry Potter is a stupid movie and another guy says, “I disagree, but you’re entitled to your opinion,”, that’s the democratic process at work also. The attributes of a democracy were very aptly described by the phrase used during the French Revolution – Liberty, Equality, Fraternity (though the latter, more sexist term might be replaced by ‘community’ in a modern setting).At least, as a democrat, that’s my opinion. I’ll leave it to an anarchist and/or a libertarian to debate the relationship between those two philosophies.World Peace and Unity,Gary
__._,_.___
"I have believed that the only way peace can be achieved is through world government" (Jawaharal Nehru)
For more information: www.worldservice.org and info@worldservice.org
For more information: www.worldservice.org and info@worldservice.org
these views are not my own . and i find lack of historical understanding often present , but it is open and relevant very often . i also see the duming down of people(s) through over specialization air-apparent (yes i deliberately spelled it that way , so get over it already) .
No comments:
Post a Comment