Utopia

[WipedOutBoy]

OK...

The ideal society...

What is it?

If we can use descriptive terms rather than one word answers like 'socialist' or 'communist', that'd probably be more interesting.

I'll post mine when the topic starts to flag and you lefties need someone to scream abuse at. :)

And nuff respect to whoever identifies what the picture I'm posting with this message represents.

[ZombieLennon]

My opinion of the ideal society is no society. I don't think you can live in peace with anyone nor live without chaos with anyone.

[pyroarchy]

At 7/27/01 04:55 AM, BaDshakespeare wrote: My opinion of the ideal society is no society. I don't think you can live in peace with anyone nor live without chaos with anyone.

Yeah, thats just one of the things that can't be worked out. Black flag of Anarchy aye? :)

[WipedOutBoy]

At 7/27/01 09:06 AM, pyroarchy wrote:

At 7/27/01 04:55 AM, BaDshakespeare wrote: My opinion of the ideal society is no society. I don't think you can live in peace with anyone nor live without chaos with anyone.

Yeah, thats just one of the things that can't be worked out. Black flag of Anarchy aye? :)

Yup.

Holy shit... Not someone on this BBS who actually knows something about anarchism surely?

Fancy putting your two cents into the increasingly childish harangue I've started on the 'Leaders in Anarchy' thread? We could really do with somebody sensible to help raise the tone...

[wdfcverfgtghm]

OK...

The ideal society...

What is it?

If we can use descriptive terms rather than one word answers like 'socialist' or 'communist', that'd probably be more interesting.

I'll post mine when the topic starts to flag and you lefties need someone to scream abuse at. :)

And nuff respect to whoever identifies what the picture I'm posting with this message represents.

Personally I think that there really never will be any ideal society. What's ideal for one person is diffrent for another but my personal soceital paradise would be Much like 1800's american frontierism. The kind of society that Is not lawless but had a great amount of freedom. Of course that would also involve no real citys and a tiny population. My view towards this is not what's best for everyone but what would placate me personally.

[twistid0000]

i dont think people are meant to live in an ideal society. ill give a few examples.

1) when youre at war your own country is your number one priority. when your at peace(were at a halfassed peace right now) all u think about is how shitty the system is.

2) people are all obsessed w sex. if we castrated ourselves we would be able to think more clearly and have better technology. in the next life we are supposedly adrogynous but im too paranoid to believe in heaven and hell.

3) theres money. money is the root of all peoples problems. people only live to make money. ever since u were a little kid your parents and the school educated u so u would be able to make a lot of money. if it wasnt for money people would be more religous, there probably wouldnt be gangs or the mob, and there probably wouldnt be countries, which eventually get on each others nerves and kill each other (by means of some of the most horrible devices like the atomic bomb) if there wasnt money the iraqis would be giving their oil to those who needed it, the hitlers and caligulas wouldnt have such an impact, we would probably not have war.

[WipedOutBoy]

At 7/28/01 06:34 AM, twistid0000 wrote: i dont think people are meant to live in an ideal society. ill give a few examples.

1) when youre at war your own country is your number one priority. when your at peace(were at a halfassed peace right now) all u think about is how shitty the system is.

2) people are all obsessed w sex. if we castrated ourselves we would be able to think more clearly and have better technology. in the next life we are supposedly adrogynous but im too paranoid to believe in heaven and hell.

3) theres money. money is the root of all peoples problems. people only live to make money. ever since u were a little kid your parents and the school educated u so u would be able to make a lot of money. if it wasnt for money people would be more religous, there probably wouldnt be gangs or the mob, and there probably wouldnt be countries, which eventually get on each others nerves and kill each other (by means of some of the most horrible devices like the atomic bomb) if there wasnt money the iraqis would be giving their oil to those who needed it, the hitlers and caligulas wouldnt have such an impact, we would probably not have war.

Egad! An idealist! Yuck!

Just kidding. Fair play to ya.

Not sure I totally agree on all points mind...

1 - Wartime thought versus peacetime thought. Surely that isn't necessarily a bad thing? It can be realistically argued that our culture, while seriously flawed in many ways, is better than many. Iraqi military dictatorship, repressive Soviet statism and even more repressive Nazi statism were all regimes worthy of a sound beating (even if it wasn't always done for the best of reasons). But during peacetime we have the chance to try to make our own culture better than it already is.

2 - Err... I think you've got some issues there dude. Sorry. From a Darwinian perspective, fucking is not only a fundamental activity in life but also our entire raison d'etre. I don't deny that society at large makes the whole thing a lot more complicated but even so... I find it hard to support your argument that sex is an inherently bad thing. Maybe you've been doing it wrong - it certainly works for me :)

3. I am inclined to support this in terms of general principle. If our value systems are too inclined towards materialism then is it to our personal detriment? Maybe. But on the other hand at least material wealth is tangible. You seem to be a religious person and I hope your faith is a comfort. But many are not and at least in a materialistic society the majority have the opportunity to have a comfortable if often uninspiring standard of living rather than hoping for the intangible, uncertain rewards of heaven (or punishments of hell).
Or, for those of a more leftist bent, replace 'religious' with 'idealistic', 'heaven' with 'utopian' and 'hell' with 'gulag'. :)

I also agree with AnarchyPenguin's point and would expand upon it - are we advanced (in a social and moral context) enough as a species to come to terms with a utopian ideal?

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 7/28/01 06:34 AM, twistid0000 wrote: i dont think people are meant to live in an ideal society. ill give a few examples.

1) when youre at war your own country is your number one priority. when your at peace(were at a halfassed peace right now) all u think about is how shitty the system is.

I beleive that the so called peace time thought as you called it is really essential for improvement. It's obvious that we have alot of problems, and have solved some, but there are still an infinite amount that need to be solved. I don't belive there is a utopian society which ever will be attained but by finding what's wrong with the system, steps can be made to solve them. Unfortunatly todays society increasingly encourages apathy towards politics and instead of focousing on self improvement, focouses on making us sheild ourselves from the world. And war time thought is just a defense mechanism to protect self and property, it's not a thought out life choice.

2) people are all obsessed w sex. if we castrated ourselves we would be able to think more clearly and have better technology. in the next life we are supposedly adrogynous but im too paranoid to believe in heaven and hell.

What's wrong with beind obsessed with sex? Maybe we would have more technology but I care more about happiness then creating a matierial item. In fact your third example agrees with this.

3) theres money. money is the root of all peoples problems. people only live to make money. ever since u were a little kid your parents and the school educated u so u would be able to make a lot of money. if it wasnt for money people would be more religous, there probably wouldnt be gangs or the mob, and there probably wouldnt be countries, which eventually get on each others nerves and kill each other (by means of some of the most horrible devices like the atomic bomb) if there wasnt money the iraqis would be giving their oil to those who needed it, the hitlers and caligulas wouldnt have such an impact, we would probably not have war.

Destroying a monetary system wouldn't help. It's the human ambition to improve one self that leads to hurting others in the process. To make a utopian society you would have to change human nature.

[shorbe]

For humans, there never could be utopia. They prefer misery and sorrow over joy, war over peace, hate over love, etc.

shorbe

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/11/01 04:59 AM, shorbe wrote: For humans, there never could be utopia. They prefer misery and sorrow over joy, war over peace, hate over love, etc.

Blah blah blah, Nihilist wanny pannys.... SOOO SAD! Right Now I would perfer some joy, this would be accomplished by getting some fucking silk boxers that don't always rip in the part where you're soppose to hang out your erection, god damned J C pennies clothing! Ohh sorry what? Ohh yes, No i disagree, some people like war over peace and hate over love, but I would hate war and only would join any armed forces if my country was in danger. I also love da' love, don't playa hate! No but seriously Usually people who say that they perfer hate are just saying that becuase they want others to think of them in a certain way, rather than showing their true emotion. I doubt that many people would rather have an abusive hateful up bringing then a wholesome loving one.

[Slizor]

Blah blah blah, Nihilist wanny pannys.... SOOO SAD! Right Now I would perfer some joy, this would be accomplished by getting some fucking silk boxers that don't always rip in the part where you're soppose to hang out your erection, god damned J C pennies clothing! Ohh sorry what? Ohh yes, No i disagree, some people like war over peace and hate over love, but I would hate war and only would join any armed forces if my country was in danger. I also love da' love, don't playa hate! No but seriously Usually people who say that they perfer hate are just saying that becuase they want others to think of them in a certain way, rather than showing their true emotion. I doubt that many people would rather have an abusive hateful up bringing then a wholesome loving one.

Damn I would like joy at the moment. I just spent the last three hours walking around my town in the rain, you know what I saw? A load of bloody miserable people. Can't people bloody enjoy the world!?

[shorbe]

Damn I would like joy at the moment. I just spent the last three hours walking around my town in the rain, you know what I saw? A load of bloody miserable people. Can't people bloody enjoy the world!?

No, they're incapable.

Anarchy: Well, be that as it may (that a lot of people say they don't like war and would like to be happy), I think Thoreau was correct in saying "The great mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation."

shorbe

[Slizor]

Anarchy: Well, be that as it may (that a lot of people say they don't like war and would like to be happy), I think Thoreau was correct in saying "The great mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation."

That's only men who like self-alienation.

[matias]

Actually, if we weren't all obsessed with sex, there would be no technology.

;)

After all, it's what our species has survived on for tens of thousands of years.

[matias]

Sorry for posting twice, but I felt this was important:

Androgynous? Like David Bowie? Cool!

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/18/01 07:33 PM, matias wrote: Actually, if we weren't all obsessed with sex, there would be no technology.

My acutal view on life, is that man is driven by these things.

1. Survival

2. Wealth

3. Sex

4. Meaningless Gratifaction.

Generally Wealth is just a way of getting 1, 3, and 4.

[cableshaft]

At 8/19/01 04:38 AM, Anarchypenguin wrote: Generally Wealth is just a way of getting 1, 3, and 4.

It's funny how all those can also be acquired without wealth, isn't it? :)

Shorbe: That's my second favorite quote by Thoreau! My first goes something like "Private opinion is more harmful than public opinion" ...the middle part is wrong, but it means the same... I'm just too tired to look it up right now...think it's even on the same page as the former quote in Walden actually, or thereabouts.

I never did reply back after I asked for how you justified work or school, but I did read it and found it interesting. Maybe sometime I'll give a formal reply to it.

As for the question about Utopia, I tend to think no society might be best as well, although I'm not as afraid of death or of the people that would be unable to survive by returning to a state of nature (I'd probably be included... in fact, most people are probably ill-equipped to deal with it, and that's thanks to good ol' convenient society). Problem is, society is consuming natural resources faster than we can replenish them, as well as making our bodies (and souls) weaker and more prone to disease wiping us out...natural selection doesn't seem to apply to us anymore. I doubt if we're evolving at all, really, because instead of natural evolution we've made new technology to make nature adapt to us instead... we can't keep it up forever.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/19/01 07:57 AM, cableshaft wrote:

At 8/19/01 04:38 AM, Anarchypenguin wrote: Generally Wealth is just a way of getting 1, 3, and 4.

It's funny how all those can also be acquired without wealth, isn't it? :)

No. I don't find it funny.

As for the question about Utopia, I tend to think no society might be best as well,

"An Optimist Belives the world is at its best, a pessimist beleives the same is true."

Nitszche

[Slizor]

"An Optimist Belives the world is at its best, a pessimist beleives the same is true."

"An Optimist belives the glass is half full, a Slizorist makes everyone else belive nothing was in the glass in the first place."

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/19/01 09:05 AM, Slizor wrote:

"An Optimist Belives the world is at its best, a pessimist beleives the same is true."

"An Optimist belives the glass is half full, a Slizorist makes everyone else belive nothing was in the glass in the first place."

That's becuase your a drunkard.

[shorbe]

cable: I'll look forward to it.

shorbe

[greytanooki]

If you guys want to read about "ideal societies" and civilization and philosophy, pick up Ishmael, My Ishmael, and The Story of B, all written by Daniel Quinn. I guarentee your brain will open and explode with interest and knowledge of our world and how we live with/against it.

[Pecos]

I also agree that we can never have an ideal society, because ideals are different in everyone's eyes. Plus it would be a pretty boring world if there was never conflict! :o)

But if I had to describe one close to being ideal, I guess I'd have to chose Plato's The Republic, that talks about the virtues in human souls: the rational (which includes wisdom), the spirited (includes courage), and appetitive (includes moderation).

But I don't agree with The Republic's divisions of the state. It mentions having a Soldier class, in which soldiers contain courageous actions. But if we live in a society where we moderate our appetites and are wise enough to live within our resources, then there is no need for a Soldier class.

anyone know what I'm talking about?

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 9/10/01 09:43 AM, UnclePecos wrote: I also agree that we can never have an ideal society, because ideals are different in everyone's eyes. Plus it would be a pretty boring world if there was never conflict! :o)

But if I had to describe one close to being ideal, I guess I'd have to chose Plato's The Republic, that talks about the virtues in human souls: the rational (which includes wisdom), the spirited (includes courage), and appetitive (includes moderation).

But I don't agree with The Republic's divisions of the state. It mentions having a Soldier class, in which soldiers contain courageous actions. But if we live in a society where we moderate our appetites and are wise enough to live within our resources, then there is no need for a Soldier class.

anyone know what I'm talking about?

Basically, what I think You're saying that if we had no ambition then there would be no need for authority.

I agree... but it's not really breaking any new ground.

My Utopia would be complete and total self gratifacation, be it by labour, rest or... luuuv. So far I get alot of the 2nd, a bit of the 1st... and none of the 3rd...

[Done1done1done]

At 9/10/01 05:24 PM, Anarchypenguin wrote:

At 9/10/01 09:43 AM, UnclePecos wrote: I also agree that we can never have an ideal society, because ideals are different in everyone's eyes. Plus it would be a pretty boring world if there was never conflict! :o)

But if I had to describe one close to being ideal, I guess I'd have to chose Plato's The Republic, that talks about the virtues in human souls: the rational (which includes wisdom), the spirited (includes courage), and appetitive (includes moderation).

But I don't agree with The Republic's divisions of the state. It mentions having a Soldier class, in which soldiers contain courageous actions. But if we live in a society where we moderate our appetites and are wise enough to live within our resources, then there is no need for a Soldier class.

anyone know what I'm talking about?

Basically, what I think You're saying that if we had no ambition then there would be no need for authority.

I agree... but it's not really breaking any new ground.

My Utopia would be complete and total self gratifacation, be it by labour, rest or... luuuv. So far I get alot of the 2nd, a bit of the 1st... and none of the 3rd...

Wow. That's quite the utopia. However, there are some people who wouldn't be able to fit into the utopia. My own idea is that every person has their own utopia, they just need to find it within themselves.