Monson might call himself an anarchist, but on the political spectrum he's not an Anarchist at all. He actually believes in small groups helpping each other. He's really into Communism with NO central Government. So he's bassically talking about what would end up in practise as Feudalism.
Think post apokalyptic tribes of people, small groups, working together, that begin with all being equal, but end up really as a structure, with the loudest voice being the one with the ideas and the eventual leader.
Fuedalism, can and does work, Communism without a Central Government can and does work very well indeed. There are places on this earth he could go to and live under those banners now. There will be places in Latin America and the Pacific that stiull run on Fuedalism, and there are places in France and Israel that are called Kabbutz.
The reason he doesnt join those, is two fold. Firstly, he doesnt want an existing structure, he wants to create his own version, which means he would see himself as the leader of the pack. Secondly, like most "anarchists" he's nothing more then an Established Government hater. If he went and truely lived out the existance he wanted...he wouldnt have a voice to talk to ANY established Government at all...what? loose his platform for speaking??
True Anarchism doesnt exist, and it cant exist where more then two people are in close geographical proximity...thats due to power discourse philosophy...as soon as you have a flow of power...you have some distinction...as soon as you have that you have a form of government...and at that moment, Anarchism evaporates. Anarchism between two people can happen...but where in the world is the population that sparse and the Government of that land so ineffective?
possibly an oasis in the middle of an african dessert...but even then, you get more then one person at the oasis, and more then two oasis talking to each other. It just doesnt work....and its not what he wants anyway.
As for the punishment...well you can argue he didnt hurt anyone...but you can equally say he broke the law regardless. I wouldnt put him in prison...I'd do what he would find the hardest...FAR harder then prison...I'd tag him and give him a curfew. He couldnt complain about lack of freedom...and yet he'd actually be in the most infuriating bondage available to a free spirit that there is.
but then I am mean
08-02-2009, 12:14 AM
Linear Mode
