<Snipped quote by Normie>

Basically agree with that 100%. (although I wouldn't immediately say anarchic practices like revolution or overthrowing a corrupt government or regime, is inherently going to lead to worse results than you started. Though I'm aware that's has been the case many times before.) But especially how that particular article portrays his arguments, it's almost parallel to socialism arguments.

mises.org/library/trouble-socialist-a… I'd probably use this to point out the problems with the concept of socialist anarchy.

I wouldn't say revolution or other government overthrows are inherently anarchic, they're only such if the goal is explicitly to create anarchy as the prevailing state of affairs afterwards. Usually (almost always, in fact), the people conducting the revolution still want to have a government afterwards, they just want a different one.

Haven't bothered to read any articles, but the concept of socialist anarchy is laughable, yeah.

.

I came to drop by and say there is a certain brand of humor to be derived from someone proclaiming "Prove that there always will be leaders." and "Prove that everyone constantly wants more." all while supporting and advocating a system that basically is theory at its absolute best and in itself has no real world applicability or proof, then speak about something else altogether. Ignoring that people cannot function without leadership or are utterly predispositioned by nature alone to desire more even when enough is already sufficient, a few interesting things happened in the real world yesterday.

While people were busy paying attention to things that do not matter - Sessions' stance on the legalization of marijuana, the Bannon debacle, the "Bigger Button" issue - they are reopening several cases, one of which is directed toward the Clinton Foundation as well as the blatant misuse and improper procedures related to classified material, to include confirming that Comey's actions were in themselves illegal. There is also confirmation from several Freedom of Information Act mandates that prove they knew all along exactly what they were doing the entire time; you can read some declassified, obviously redacted, Classified information here due to those requests. One of the more entertaining things is that they discuss stored and backed up information.

But it does not end there, no, rather the infamous records of Fusion GPS will be delivered despite the lengthy efforts to prevent it. Yet the momentum has continued elsewhere, as Manafort has begun a lawsuit against the Department of Justice, namely Mueller and Rosenstein, for their overreaching of boundaries about the proposed collusion of Donald Trump and the Russian government. In fact, the filing is even available at this moment, strongly suggesting he has largely been cleared of any proposed wrongdoing based upon his motion to file suit.

Also, something for everyone, which we should all be pleased with.

@catchamber Okay, at this point all you're doing is repeating yourself while providing absolutely no evidence.

wakeup-world.com/2017/01/04/the-cycle…

All that can be summed up with a burden of proof fallacy and wasting my time by posting memes against my theoretical responses to your non-existent scenario. Are you saying people don't ask for impossible things like becoming a dragon or woman when they aren't in society? Or ask/believe for things that aren't possible? Must I immediately proof you haven't been paying attention? You're asking why would people rationally protest if they got everything they wanted. Well when the helk did you ever consider human beings purely rational creatures? Instead of emotional ones?

Try wuting me out of things that already take place nowadays...at this point we're past being contrarian and instead being completely disingenuous. You wanting an infinite resource machine that already can't happen and doesn't exist, you can't tell more people don't want more when that's what the very beginning proposal is. (creating a machine where literally everything feasible to dispense is given to you.)

debate.org/opinions/is-water-wet

createdebate.com/debate/show/Is_water…

huffingtonpost.com/david-finkle/new-s…

Also, since you're using meme's yet you don't realize the meme of the debate of water being wet. Here's the wut you're looking for.

.

@catchamber My point was already made, you just don't read my sources and you keep not answering any questions I ask, for starters. But again, burden of proof fallacy. Learn what that is and please stop using it. (You're entire argument needs evidence. I don't need the evidence to disprove something you have no evidence for.)

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

The link already goes into human psychology of why people want more. Where is your source of an infinite machine ever existing?

Edit: My evidence to people needing and wanting leaders, is nearly every single country, state, sport team, parade, army, animal pack and everything else in the world having them. You need conscious thought to do just about everything and law is order, where does complete lawlessness benefit society?

Now, assuming you have a serious point to make, where's your counter examples of what you provided? (Hopefully more than Commensalism, which is specifically about two organisms, like fish and fungus.) Not a large group of people that needs to function as a society.

.

Can you not strawman me, bro? I explicitly said that I wasn't talking about limitless resources.

Beyond all of this, let's consider a scenario where everyone's survival needs are taken care of via automated systems. What exactly would a bunch of ocean dwellers need to riot about, how would they riot, and why?

Don't start being purposefully obnoxious please. Unlike everyone else on this forum (least often seems that way), I can see sarcasm oozing out the words typed.

Even schools of goddamn fish follow a leader...so you might need to try a little bit harder. <.<

independent.co.uk/news/science/fish-s…

Edit: Yes and birds too.

civilsocietyhowto.org/migrating-birds…

Birds share leadership. When they fly in the v-formation, for instance, the lead bird works the hardest. Many of the birds in the flock take turns flying lead so that no one bird collapses from exhaustion. In flocks of pigeons, even the weakest birds sometimes lead.

.

@catchamber No. Just no. I'm just hoping you have the self awareness necessary that a school of fish is nothing like the word you described, I literally just debunked that. (Your not even human example of your whole point...)

(If I called you full of shit, I have a feeling I'd get a captain obvious south park meme...)

*Makes extraordinary claims that fly in the face of everything we know about sociology, archaeology, history and anthropology*

*Demands others prove their 'points'*

.

@SleepingSilence Traits of an adhocracy:

• highly organic structure
• little formalization of behavior
• job specialization not necessarily based on formal training
• a tendency to group the specialists in functional units for housekeeping purposes but to deploy them in small, market-based project teams to do their work
• a reliance on liaison devices to encourage mutual adjustment within and between these teams
• low or no standardization of procedures
• roles not clearly defined
• selective decentralization
• work organization rests on specialized teams
• power-shifts to specialized teams
• horizontal job specialization
• high cost of communication (dramatically reduced in the networked age)
• culture based on non-bureaucratic work

The bold parts definitely sound like features inherent to school of fish or flock of birds.

@Penny Lol, you don't understand chemistry or biology.

You killin me smalls. I just don't know how much of my sanity can take of this. I'll admit you got me to laugh, (in a "I give up" kind of way. But I almost appreciate this discussion like I would a bad song.)

How many ways can I go about debunking a joke...as if it was serious...

Well, we'll start with your own post (which I know you didn't do on purpose, hence why I call it obnoxious and plead to try harder. If you want to be funny, put some more effort in it is all I'm asking for here.) is just the wikipedia list of the word and you tacitly admit the ones in bold are the only parts that apply. When you need a large majority or all for it to be considered one. And you have 6 of the 13 highlighted...and the last two you couldn't of highlighted with a straight face. A dead man would be rolling in his grave.

roles not clearly defined

nature.com/news/precision-formation-f…

Birds roles and formations in flight are often precise. So doesn't even work there either.

High cost of communication (dramatically reduced in the networked age)

I'll give you my third born child, if you can give me a good enough explanation, on how in the flying fuck, does high cost of communication apply to fish and birds. I'll will literally wait an eternity, please don't spare me any details.

.

@catchamber Is net neutrality effecting birds now too? (in the digital age) A single sentence is not enough I'm afraid...but you have more than enough time to try again.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081…

Also, about my conscious thought. Even fish choose leaders...

discoverwildlife.com/animals/birds/ar…

sciencemag.org/news/2010/04/when-pige…

And birds...again have leaders...even when the goalpost is being moved, I already mentioned the possibility of multiple leaders but the fact remains leaders are necessary in both things and you have yet to debunk this.

.

@catchamber Okay, I found something more interesting to do. So keeping it brief and ending it. You aren't debunking anything by saying something is garbage and you yourself have provided no real sources of your own. You also can't read...



They put their source of information in the very upper title.

lmgtfy.com/?q=Cell+press+study+on+fish

Are you denying that the birds listed don't have pecking orders? Must I also google that for you too?

I digress, I'm bored with this. You haven't proven your point in human hierarchies which was the original point. I don't need to, the fact is it would likely bound to happen eventually...if one needed to be picked. I mean it's already done in real life...and usually it's not actually that difficult of a task.

.

Are you guys seriously arguing about whether birds have leaders in flocks or not? I'm not sure if this is some really elaborate (and genius) trolling, or you guys really think bird formations should in some manner relate to human society.