|
Junkie
|
This seems to me to be very similiar to politics of celebrated anarchists like Proudhun and Bakunin and other pre-Soviet revolutionaries; tinged with perhaps just a little more ominous threats of violence.
Permit me to quote from Proudhon directly.
Quote:
|
"To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place[d] under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality." (P.-J. Proudhon, General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century, translated by John Beverly Robinson (London: Freedom Press, 1923), pp. 293-294.)
|
Personally, I don't subscribe to this political point of view (and are probably almost diametrically opposed on the political spectrum!), but find it interesting to see such a lengthy defence posted here.
Would it be acceptable to engage in a question and answer type debate? I really am interested and whilst I don't think I could ever convince you to change your position, I would like to understand them more; and perhaps even debate both our political beliefs.
Mr Mephisto |