Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

[Penny]

Why not? We are already accepting the absence of evidence that contradicts theoretical pre-neolitc anarchist tribes that somehow lack the characteristics of all societies, primitive and modern, known to ethnographers and anthropologists as evidence for the practicality of anarchism in a world with nuclear weapons and space flight.

[Normie]

Well I wouldn't say the claims go against known science, since catchamber is pretty clear that he's only speaking theoretical terms. Such as "consider if we had automated systems that took care of everyone's need without any human input." Like sure, if you assume away scarcity, we don't really have any scientific point of reference for how things would turn out, since that's so radically outside of the human experience up to this point. I don't find much use in such exercises though, as once you go outside of known parameters and create theoretical ones, you can make any logic work (i.e. if we start from the assumption that the Bible is the absolute truth of the universe because God, then yes, the universe is 6000 years old, and such like).

[POOHEAD189]

@Normie
Catchamber's original statement was arguing that humans today have the technology that makes government obsolete if we'd but utilize it.

Theoretically, governments aren't even necessary to manage the world today.

@catchamber

It was my challenging that thesis that led to this discussion. And from what all of history, archaeology, and anthropology have shown us is that we as a species are in need of some form of societal structure.

[mdk]

um

I imagine that every instance of major technological progress, from the wheel to the cell phone, has been accompanied by the sentiment that life can now be a utopian paradise and governments are no longer necessary. Eventually that will be true. Wanna know how to spot it? We won't have governments anymore, because absolutely nobody would consent to that shit unless it were necessary.

Birds have democratic governments, their president is the Bald Eagle.

Fish are an anarchocapitalist dynastic meritocracy.

[Normie]

@Normie
Catchamber's original statement was arguing that humans today have the technology that makes government obsolete if we'd but utilize it.

<Snipped quote by catchamber>
It was my challenging that thesis that led to this discussion. And from what all of history, archaeology, and anthropology have shown us is that we as a species are in need of some form of societal structure.

@POOHEAD189

His first word of that quote is "theoretically" though. Not "realistically." Though I see what you mean, yes.

[SleepingSilence]

@Frettzo Sort of neither of the things presented really...it was more the equivalent of those smoked out of your mind conversations you have about 'changing the world man' but instead one of you is sober just humoring the debate. Doesn't matter how seriously either person took it, but genius is about as diametrically opposed as it could get.

@Normie The only problem was this theory was all he had, and he somehow wanted evidence to debunk an impossible scenario. And his defenses of it, made it clear that his only point was based in fantasy and inaccuracies. Even in theory it goes against human nature and science, he also lambasted the idea of a theory of his theory, like he depended it to work in reality. There's a fine line between making fantasy scenarios and dogmatically defending those fantasy ideals. (Whether sarcastically or not.)

[Polymorpheus]

.

[SleepingSilence]

You're the one defending the eternal necessity of governments, Then you have to admit that functional anarchy can exist.

@catchamber

Though I'm not, at least not this current conversation between you and me. It was never about that.

In your contrarian ways, you forgot (or again are pretending in such a way it wouldn't matter.) that I already played devil's advocate by posting something having to do with anarchy possibly working. My argument was it was equally if not more logical than typical arguments for socialism. (even though that's basically what it advocated for.) Which also wasn't what you were ever talking about...which you yourself told me that you had problems with what was in it (the article about anarchy working.) than never actually told me what was wrong with it.

Are we arguing about anarchy? Or about human nature wanting leaders, not being an obvious and important truth of the world? It never was about both.

I still don't know outside of -not- birds or fish. Because both have instances of seeking leadership, as many in the animal kingdoms have their alpha's and beta's. What actual human instances we have were in between having strong leadership and no strong leadership, people would willingly choose the latter category.

[Polymorpheus]

.

[SleepingSilence]

@catchamber
I did some of those things already.

Also, you didn't answer my question.

And have yet to provide counter evidence of your own.

Why did you type it like that?

[POOHEAD189]

Prove that there will always be a leader in every group.

Prove that groups can't form without the conscious effort to do so.

Prove that there can't be order without a solid direction.

Prove that everyone constantly wants more.

Prove that all of that's true in every possible circumstance.

@catchamber

[The Harbinger of Ferocity]

And have yet to provide counter evidence of your own.

@SleepingSilence

I believe that sums up the entirety of the issues with the theorizing going on toward the list of matters portrayed. Now for something entirely different. Yes, the Gorilla Channel has become an actual problem, no longer just the absurdist nonsense it was originally as a meme, which is based upon a book that is already mostly fictional despite how the media are taking it. It seems both journalism and authorship are dead, given some quotes from the article that source the writer himself in his book:

"Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book.

"Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in the accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true."

Michael Wolff

[SleepingSilence]

@POOHEAD189

I'll admit, I'm just perplexed but intrigued by that gif and it's purpose. :I

...I have nothing more to add.

[POOHEAD189]

I'll admit, I'm just perplexed but intrigued by that gif and it's purpose. :I

...I have nothing more to add.

@SleepingSilence

I believe the burden of proof is on Catchamber and not yourself, and yet he asks for proof which leads to the gif because I am perplexed.

[SleepingSilence]

@POOHEAD189 Oh, well thank you. :3 (Though I was referring to the exact reaction giving by the gif. I'm curious to where that gif is from and what made that reaction happen.)

I'm still not convinced that this isn't just a very long running joke that doesn't have a punch line. My ex-roommate almost had me conditioned to humor arguing over nothing, literally just starting illogical debates just to do so, because I'm just so used to doing it...but unlike my ex-roommate I have limits how much free time I'm willing to waste. <.<' (though that's partly because I have very little patience in general.)

[mdk]

What actual human instances we have were in between having strong leadership and no strong leadership, people would willingly choose the latter category.

@SleepingSilence

Well yeah, a SHITLOAD of people voted for Hilary.

[POOHEAD189]

Well yeah, a SHITLOAD of people voted for Hilary.

@mdk

They loved her so much they voted for her multiple times! _{[citation needed]}

[mdk]

<Snipped quote by mdk>
They loved her so much they voted for her multiple times! _{[citation needed]}

@POOHEAD189

My grandfather was actually a big-time Hilary supporter, like, huge. Voted for her in the primaries and the general election.

Of course he's been dead for five years, but that's the kind of popularity Hilary had.

[Andreyich]

@SleepingSilence How am I repeating myself? I'm asking you to prove your assumptions. Prove your point, or admit that you're full of shit, yo.

@catchamber

I know this might be hard to grasp but you need to prove the inverse

nvm people already brought this up like 6 times (to which there wasn't an adequate response but oh well )

[Polymorpheus]

.