quetzalcoatl wrote: What question?
Ummm... the OP?
quetzalcoatl wrote:Nobody will eve understand anything if you only talk to the converted.
This doesn't mean anything. He posted this in anarchism. If he wanted random comments he would have asked it somewhere more... public. Point is, he asked it here expecting those interested in Anarchism or similar ideologies would give answers and/or critique him. Not everyone else.
quetzalcoatl wrote: No you can't.
You can flee as fast you can, but you can never escape your history, both on an individual level and on a societal level. You don't ever start from zero, you start from the particular point in the social matrix where you were deposited.
We'll just have to agree to disagree, I find most things can be left behind in time both individually and socially. It's actually rather simple to start from zero.
quetzalcoatl wrote:You're being somewhat obtuse. At some point you stop talking about making the journey, and actually make the first step on the journey.
I'm actually not. I'm trying to address the implication you seem to have been making that looking into Anarchism is simply a child's errand, and represents running away from life's problems or something. Furthermore, as far as talking about walking, I don't even know what that's supposed to mean anymore. People from other walks of the political spectrum always say things like that, "Well you're not a real _________" unless you've A) murdered people in cold blood for it, B) Blown something up, C) formed a workers strike that shut down some major operation, D) Are making secret trips through the tunnels to Mexico (insert nearby impoverished nation for non-US locations) to meet with
real revolutionaries. It's tiresome and annoying.
The psychological burden this imposes is nearly unbearable: it is no accident that the founders of neo-conservatism were Marxists.
I just don't see it. In fact its quite liberating to realize how much it sucks to be a vassal of the state. To me, what you are saying sounds like what sounds logical to one who will never really understand Anarchism, nor any other revolutionary state of mind, and decry it simply because it isn't comfortable at times.
What is the specific nature of this psychological burden? Constantly remaining on the cusp of rebellion (often for decades) without ever taking the first step to commit. Whether it is not paying taxes or something else is irrelevant, it is the act of commitment that frees you from the deadening stasis.
I think you're reading far too much into the internet.
ingliz wrote:Why do you choose to defend his position?
Actually, that wasn't my intention.
"When do you ask yourself,
'Maybe everyone else isn't wrong for using the definitions of words; maybe I'm wrong for making up new definitions of words and then using them as crude slurs' -TiG