Talk:Anarch (sovereign individual)

message: Does this really merit an article to itself? I mean, how long could it be? Just wondering. --AaronS 15:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. --AaronS 22:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no grounds for combining this article with that on anarchist, no grounds of influence, commonality, historical connection, ideological overlap, nothing at all.  Based on the grounds given in my comments below, I'm going to tag this for notability.   Sindinero (talk) 02:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

text: The material on Crowley appear to be original research. A source for these views of Crowley needs to be cited. 88.80.200.144 (talk) 03:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

text: That's interesting, and certainly doesn't speak in favor of the article's notability.  I notice you're the creator of this article - what's your opinion on whether to improve it (and how to do so), or to nominate it for deletion?  Sindinero (talk) 17:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability?

message: I'm not sure how this relates to Anarcho-Monarchism, but seeing as Sovereignty tells me that both are the same thing, i suggest this be merged into Anarcho-Monarchism. Not officially, simply because I don't know a thing about the subject. A quick google gives me 600 hits on anarcho-monarchism, so things might even be nn.
-The preceding signed comment was added by Nazgjunk (talk • contrib) 16:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely anarcho-monarchism would amount to something of an oxymoron since it advocates hierarchy while simultaneously opposing it, unless I have misunderstood the phrase somehow. 204.184.133.20 03:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  this vs. [[Anarcho-Monarchism]] 

message: I think the wording needs to be changed substantially in the second-to-last sentence of the first paragraph. To say that Jünger "exemplified the attitude of the anarch his whole life" is vague, problematic, possibly untrue; its tone is either juvenile, sycophantic, or both, and befits a fansite or hagiography more than an encylopedia article. I would suggest either deletion or rewording to indicate that he aspired or claimed to exemplify this attitude. This is something that can be backed by evidence, while the fact that he actually did exemplify this attitude is much more amorphous - what type of evidence could prove or disprove it? It's a huge claim and, considering Jünger's complex, yet highly reactionary and problematic politics, a messy claim to make. Sindinero (talk) 12:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claims about Jünger as anarch 

message: I would also suggest merging this page with Ernst Jünger's - as it stands, this page doesn't have much of an autonomous existence apart from Jünger, as the bulk of the article and almost all the links are Jünger-related. Since the anarch seems to be a more or less totally Jünger-inflected concept and, as the article stands, it doesn't evince much of an independent existence as a political concept, why not combine it with the page on the author?Sindinero (talk) 13:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge w/ Ernst Jünger page? 

message: The term was originally coined by Milton in Paradise Lost, Book II in a description of Satan as taking the helm of the void/chaos/hell.  It is a somewhat confusing section where the abstractions of Chaos and Night are personified and who reign over the region before Satan (the Morning Star) takes over.  The reference obviously combines the meanings of "Monarch" and Anarchy" which in the context of Paradise Lost makes perfect sense.
Someone needs to fix the reference to Junger as the originator of this term, as it is totally inaccurate.  And though his meaning may have been novel, his usage is not even close to the first chronologically.
173.79.135.70 (talk) 23:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of term Anarch is incorrect 

message: How does this have any relationship to the category of Conservatism?  Conservatives in some instances advocate for less government, but they never advocate no government, nor suggest that all government is inherently invalid.  166.152.32.247 (talk) 02:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTF? 

message: Could someone clarify what the purpose of this article is? It appears to consist largely of a WP:QUOTEFARM plus two sources that looked dubious to me, including a blog and a web site, which may or may not be Anarcho leaning. Any feedback? K.e.coffman (talk) 22:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged. czar 17:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of the article