From: ausman@ocf.berkeley.edu (James Ausman)
Newsgroups: alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: Which brand(s) of anarchy?
Date: 28 Sep 1992 23:56:40 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: world,local
NNTP-Posting-Host: hailstorm.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Sep16.183055.16394@uwm.edu> glenne@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Neuromancer ) writes:
> 
>Bravo!  You're on the right road.  Education, Compassion, and
>Understanding will take you there.  But don't destroy the
>government!  Peacefully and non-coercively convince most of
>society, and those who govern of the error of their ways.
> 
I would not be in favor of destroying the government either.  But the one we have
certainly stinks and have very little hope of reforming it.  So what else is 
there to do?
>>>
>>>Why do you think the goevernment exists?  Because people think
>>>they can free us from the violence and coercion of thugs, by
>>>using violence and coercion.  And so the government becomes the
>>>biggest thug of all.  Yet many of you fools think we should use
>>>V&C to stop the V&C of the government.
>>>
>>>Based on the violent actions of the Anarchy movement in the past,
>>>I reject it as selfish, moronic, and one of the greatest
>>>obstacles to freedom.

Based on the violent actions of governments in the past I reject them
as selfish, moronic, and one of the greatest obstacles to freedom. :)
> 
>Let's quit pretending that our justice system deters people
>from hurting each other.  Quite the opposite.  Justice is a
>nice way of saying revenge.  I have no use for revenge.

Hear, hear!

>>Don't vote!
> 
>I plan on voting,
>as soon as none of the above is on the ballot.
> 
I, for one, plan on voting, and doing everything else to wrest power from the powerful
and redistubute it amongst the powerless.

I have a problem with you version of extreme nonviolence, though.  Nothing personal, I would
love to live in a society of like-minded people.  Unfortunately, I do not.  I believe, like you
that the only real change will come from the bottom.  I am also astonished by humanities 
cooperative and compassionate qualities, especially in a society that does it's best to destroy
these qualities, or at best, pervert them to enable people to be more easily controlled.  
I also work on grass roots cooperative structures that reduce the powere and authority of
the centralist greed-driven "System" that most are beholden to.  Unlike you however, I believe
that we are only tolerated insofar as we are not a real threat.  As soon as a significant number
of us start to cooperate, or as soon as we achieve a significant amount of power, we will have
the coporate and or state security blowing up our cars, tapping our phones, reading our newsgroups,
infiltrating our communities, etc. etc. etc.  And I don't think that nonviolent revolutions have
a very good track record, especially against opponents willing to use force.  Maybe the break
up of the USSR proves me wrong, but I would argue otherwise.  I am disturbed the right has 
pretty near a monopoly on force in this country. So I would argue that those of us who really
want to change things learn how to use weapons and make explosives as well as a little basic
infantry tactics.  You never can tell when you might need them.  

Jim Ausman

-- 
	I don't even call it violence when it is used in self defence.
	I call it intellegence.
					-Malcolm X
Newsgroups: alt.society.anarchy