JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Forums

originally posted in:Secular Sevens
originally posted in: Which book should I buy next?
Edited by Gaara444: 11/10/2013 3:53:07 PM
7
All of them except number one seem pretty good.
English

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Is that because you generally dislike Oscar Wilde? Or because you just don't like socialism? [spoiler]Kropotkin was a Communist.[/spoiler]

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • His book shows his belief of anarchism rather than socialism contrary to the title really. Although it's not so much the socialism aspect that bothers me, rather his warped view of capitalism. Believing capitalism prevents people from recognizing their true talent and simply living the way they want. It doesn't make sense from a personal point of view. If you're happy doing something you're not good at, why should you follow your natural talent just because you're good at it?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Well, if anything, anarchism and socialism are inexorably linked. One, in my view, cannot be an anarchist and a capitalist. In all fairness, though, I don't know why Wilde chose to use the term socialism in his title as opposed to anarchism. Maybe people didn't see socialism as almost exclusively Marxist back then? As for the second point, I'm much more Nietzschean in that regard. I think that morality is the driving force behind disallowing people to recognise their greatness, or their talents, but that isn't to say capitalism doesn't play something of a central role. As for following one's talent when it doesn't make one happy? Well. Those who invented happiness were the most evil people on the planet. But I'm not going to go insofar as to dictate how I think others should live their lives in that respect.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote]anarchism rather than socialism[/quote]Anarchism is a form of socialism.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I thought anarchism was complete no government no anything. Just all out madness.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by Florence: 11/10/2013 4:16:36 PM
    Socialism is defined as a mode of production involving worker control of the means of production (i.e. workers control their work places, not bosses). Anarchism is a form of socialism which opposes not only capitalism, but [i]all[/i] oppressive hierarchies which limit human freedom, including the state, racism, etc. Anarchists don't advocate ''all out madness''; in fact, they advocate anarchy in order to maximize freedom & happiness. After all, Proudhon did say ''anarchy is order'' (this is what the encircled A means; A for anarchy, O for order). In short, anarchy means no rulers, not no rules.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • No. Anarchism has nothing to do with lawlessness or chaos. It is simply a minimisation of hierarchy and coercion. This, however, does include abolition (or nearly abolishing, in the case of libertarianism) of the State and the replacement of capitalism.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon