Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm a socialist anarchist myself, and i just want a debate on Anarchism, it doesn't matter whether you're a market anarchist, a nihilist or a capitalist, i just wanna talk about anarchy vs. anything, so feel free to join in ^^

Anarchy? The state of being with no leadership. That's it.

Can you confirm for me omni dose that mean you don't want so called "Party whips" in the legislation houses.

Generally the idea of Anarchy, although i reckon that you can't have a society with no form of organisation, which is why i'm a socialist anarchist, which, as with anything involving the word Anarchism, is very open to interpretation, but for me means a society with an open senate rather than an elected government, which basically means that anybody and everybody can come to senate meetings (but are not forced to) and make their points, and give their ideas to the rest of the senate, and it should be a democratic system as well, so anything new happening, i.e, new laws etc should be voted on by everyone at the senate when it comes up (if you're not at a senate, and something comes up and is voted for, and you don't like it, it's tough.)

How so? communism is pretty much the same as socialism, to my understanding, except that communism has one definite leader, while socialism is more senate-based, so therefore, in communism as it's practice, anarcho-communism is an oxymoron, or at least more so than socialist anarchism (or anarcho-socialism, however you like it).

If you can explain a definite difference between commnism and socialism that makes your statement true, then i'll be happy to accept that what you say is correct.

I'm pretty sure that that's not "pure" socialism, i mean, if you look at the word, social, from the latin, meaning people (or some such) and from the same root as society and sociology etc, and i think what you're describing is what some might call one form of it, where an elected body makes decisions on behlaf of the people, but in the most truthful way possible, it's "purest" form would be, as described by Marx, an abolition of money, markets, capital, and labor as a commodity, which if anything means it is a more extreme form of communism. I think the elected body version is the one that's most common today, i.e. socialism in france, but i don't think it can be called the purest form, seen as how socialism was developed by marx and his peers along with communism etc.

Anarchy will not work; the animal kingdom is composed of social order. You can not destroy a dynamic trait of the animal kingdom such as social order. Thus, nor will anarchy work.

Communism trys it, but the leader quickly becomes a dictator. Thats social order for you.