- Anything Else -

And if anarchists could fly

Posted by: Robert on August 06, 1999 at 11:48:23:

In Reply to: Giant blue flying pigs. posted by Gideon on July 29, 1999 at 18:28:41:

Gideon, my dear chap,

Thanks you for the (er hem) kind note.

: I said "anarchism" and "anarchist"; not "anarchy"; as did Floyd. Read more carefully in future. Anarchism is a specific term that has nothing to do with violence and very very little to do with the usual public perception of "anarchy". Your terminology is simply incorrect.

Floyd did a splendid job in explaining it further and my thanks to him for that. My question to you is, How do you have an "ism" and "ist" without "y"? Perhaps the "trailer park" has gotten the better of me here.


: Ask yourself also why the Slavs were trying to expel the Kosovars?; because they were not Christians; a clear example of the Serbian government using existing Christian bigotry to fuel genocide.

: (And the Kosovar Moslems are responding with equal and opposite bigotry in the name of revenge...)

Actually Christ gave His harshest criticism TO the religious. See Matthew 23 (Woe to ye scribes and Pharisees). Christ doesn't teach us to be "religious". He teaches us to be Godly. There is a major difference between being religious and being Godly. If Christ's Name is being used to further man's will, instead of God's, surely there will be hypocrisy manifested.


: Non sequitur. Blue is a colour. Black is not a colour. Red is also a colour. Therefore Red is more like Blue than Black is. It doesn't follow. There comes a point at which a given example is so remote as to be useless.

Perhaps anarchist could fly, too.


: Perfectly true. Governments tend to find anarchism to be repulsive; thus they try to destroy it wherever they find it. As such, large-scale anarchist communities have never existed for long. That doesn't invalidate the theory.

Why then do you spend a whole life time trying to achieve something that will never amount to anything enduring? It sounds at best, a bit self-defeating, and at worst, a bit masochistic if you don't mind me saying here.


Now the inquisition starts.

: Are you a pacifist, Robert?

(with a finger in my face) Er, ugh, ee, I'm not sure.

GUILTY!

: Would you turn the other cheek?

(now staring back at the eyes behind the hoods) Er, a, eeg, I guess so.

GUILTY, AGAIN!


: I am a pacifist; and I have been a pacifist all of my adult life and half of my teens as well. Because I don't believe in imposing my views on others, whether it be with missionaries or physical compulsion.

: It cuts both ways; I will also not accept anyone attempting to force their views on me.

Thanks for saving me a brow beating here. Cheers and God Bless.

Robert


Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup