• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.
How can anarchists be tyrannical?

Very easily. A group of people can easily take on a sort of "hive mind" in which they get whipped into a frenzy by their own actions and commit acts of violence and hatred against others.

Any mob in history that has murdered people is proof of the possibility of tyranny in anarchy. Of course, this doesn't mean that anarchy always results in tyranny, just as Lenin's actions are not proof that Marxism always results in tyranny.
 
How can anarchists be tyrannical?
Or their 'bloodlust'?
Is tyranny not the opposite of anarchy?

This:

Very easily. A group of people can easily take on a sort of "hive mind" in which they get whipped into a frenzy by their own actions and commit acts of violence and hatred against others.

Any mob in history that has murdered people is proof of the possibility of tyranny in anarchy. Of course, this doesn't mean that anarchy always results in tyranny, just as Lenin's actions are not proof that Marxism always results in tyranny.
 
Poll:

Total - 64 votes :cool:

Independents: 21

Anarchists: 18

Marxist-Leninsts: 16

Militarists: 6

Moderates: 3
 
When do the polls close?
 
To the citizens of the VSVR,

A PROPOSAL: THE RÄTEREPUBLIK

Fellow Anarchists, it is clear by now that we will not, by ourselves, form the government of this country. That this should be a problem may seem absurd to those familiar with our doctrine, and yet it has been a pressing issue for several decades now. I submit that it truly is an absurdity that we should wish to form, especially as a single faction, a government in the current state of affairs. Given our position in the current elections, I pose a proposal that, while perhaps not completely resolving the conflict between Anarchism and government, should be achievable and desirable to all, rather than merely to those convinced by our ideas. But before I present the proposal, there are some practicalities to get out of the way.

A COALITION

It is time that we formed a coalition. The Independents have the support they have because they would have a freer press. Our ideas in that regard may not be identical, but they are certainly compatible. In many other ways, it makes sense that we would not desire to lead a country alone. As Anarchists, we represent freedom, including the freedom to hold dissenting opinions and, this is important, to put them into action freely. Freedom, of course, implies that all concerned by such actions have participated into the planning and decision-making process so that consensus is reached, or failing that, the most acceptable compromise achieved. It should be common sense that, given the centralised party structure, we should not rule alone, enforcing dictates from above. The Independents have united around a number of issues, but represent a number of diverse viewpoints. This makes them prime candidates for an alliance representing both majorities and minorities. And, of course, they have so far the greatest support from Party members. This may not be a great gauge of popular support, but it certainly is significant, as we must cohabitate with a large array of opinions.

A NEW FORM OF GOVERNMENT

My proposal, then, is in line with the values implicit in such a coalition: the Räterepublic. In reaction to the impossibility of ending the State in the immediate future, our best hope, and indeed the best hope of the working class, is the establishment of a new system of government, for a freer, radically democratic society. It may even, in a way, prepare the ground for the end of the nation-state. A government consisting solely of local, democratic councils, räte, federated into a coherent structure for cooperation, conciliation, concertation and defense. All representatives on various levels would be directly elected, with a clear mandate, and would be recalled if the people they represent judge that the mandate has not been fulfilled. This requires great decentralisation in most matters, though the principle of federalism allows concertation on any scale. It also require transparency and deference to the wishes of the people, executed as much as possible by the people themselves. What it does not require is censorship, harassment or dissolution of any political group, nor the end of the democratic and electoral process, though its form will be different. What it offers is obvious: a new society, freer for Anarchists as for everyone else, who may petition the people and who are held accountable for their actions on the political sphere by the people themselves and not petty politicking cliques. It may not be the end of the State, it may not be the end of the Army, it may not be the end of all central planning, but it's a cause we can all strive for. Through elections, we will never establish the ideal of anarchism. We may, however, establish something better than the status quo, without the coercion inherent in the system we now manoeuvre within.

OUR STRATEGY

It is not the policy of the Independents to establish the Ratërepublik, and therefore it is unlikely to simply be established in one single political action. What we ought to do is work with the Independents and with all factions we can, so that we may move closer to it. This means:

-Encouraging democracy on a local level
-Promoting transparency in every public office
-Gradually shift decision making from centralised institutions to local organisations
-Form committees and institutions independent from political control
-And, of course, supporting freedom of press and speech at every level, to facilitate the transmission of all information, as well as entertainment (such as cartoons of any kind)!

This is not the platform that will realise the anarchist ideal. But we are here putting forward a party platform: it is an absurdity. A party cannot realise the anarchist ideal. So comrades, let us prepare the ground for this ideal instead, and make a better world for all in the process!

- Comrade Ryke
 
A piece by Ryke outlining a new idea for the Republic.
 
In general, I like this proposal. More democracy and transparency is essentially a good thing, especially the possibility to recall representatives that have become corrupt or who do not follow the programme they got elected for.

-Encouraging democracy on a local level
-Promoting transparency in every public office

All good and sensible, I can't see any reason to oppose this.

-Gradually shift decision making from centralised institutions to local organisations

This I don't nessecarily agree with. In some cases, decision-making should be local; in others, it has to be central. I don't think this is something that can be generalized in this manner but should rather be judged on a case-to-case basis.

-Form committees and institutions independent from political control

This is the opposite of democracy; that's exactly how capitalism works. People no-one has elected, without accountability, making decisions? We should be doing the countrary. More and more of society should be under political, i.e. democratic control, not less. If it's not under political control, it's under private control - those with wealth and power will be the ones making the decisions. We need a society where political decisions, under the principle of one person one vote, is the dominant form of decision-making, rather than the capitalist, private, one dollar (reichsmark?) one vote. We need democratic control over all institutions that influence our lives. Not self-appointed comittee-men, "independent" from having to care about what ordinary people think.


-And, of course, supporting freedom of press and speech at every level, to facilitate the transmission of all information, as well as entertainment (such as cartoons of any kind)!

This issue keeps coming up. Yes, freedom of information is essential, but by privatizing the press, information will be in the hands of the wealthy and powerful, again the direct opposite of democracy. We need a democratic press, not a private press.
 
We really need to separate the revolution from the State. The State is a necessary evil, a tool for the revolution, not the aim of the revolution. Unfortunately it has become more a Revolution of the State than a Revolution of the People. This need to change.
 
We really need to separate the revolution from the State. The State is a necessary evil, a tool for the revolution, not the aim of the revolution. Unfortunately it has become more a Revolution of the State than a Revolution of the People. This need to change.

What does this man? What do you want to separate and why?
 
We really need to separate the revolution from the State. The State is a necessary evil, a tool for the revolution, not the aim of the revolution. Unfortunately it has become more a Revolution of the State than a Revolution of the People. This need to change.

Wouldn't the final Revolution of the State be its disbandment and the ushering in of Communism? "Revolution of the People" implies you want to change some inherent feature of the people (i.e. their ideals or their beliefs) which makes sense since we should be encouraging people to be moral and hard-working and independent and what not.

A NEW FORM OF GOVERNMENT

My proposal, then, is in line with the values implicit in such a coalition: the Räterepublic. In reaction to the impossibility of ending the State in the immediate future, our best hope, and indeed the best hope of the working class, is the establishment of a new system of government, for a freer, radically democratic society. It may even, in a way, prepare the ground for the end of the nation-state. A government consisting solely of local, democratic councils, räte, federated into a coherent structure for cooperation, conciliation, concertation and defense. All representatives on various levels would be directly elected, with a clear mandate, and would be recalled if the people they represent judge that the mandate has not been fulfilled. This requires great decentralisation in most matters, though the principle of federalism allows concertation on any scale. It also require transparency and deference to the wishes of the people, executed as much as possible by the people themselves. What it does not require is censorship, harassment or dissolution of any political group, nor the end of the democratic and electoral process, though its form will be different. What it offers is obvious: a new society, freer for Anarchists as for everyone else, who may petition the people and who are held accountable for their actions on the political sphere by the people themselves and not petty politicking cliques. It may not be the end of the State, it may not be the end of the Army, it may not be the end of all central planning, but it's a cause we can all strive for. Through elections, we will never establish the ideal of anarchism. We may, however, establish something better than the status quo, without the coercion inherent in the system we now manoeuvre within.

OUR STRATEGY

It is not the policy of the Independents to establish the Ratërepublik, and therefore it is unlikely to simply be established in one single political action. What we ought to do is work with the Independents and with all factions we can, so that we may move closer to it. This means:

-Encouraging democracy on a local level
-Promoting transparency in every public office
-Gradually shift decision making from centralised institutions to local organisations
-Form committees and institutions independent from political control
-And, of course, supporting freedom of press and speech at every level, to facilitate the transmission of all information, as well as entertainment (such as cartoons of any kind)!

This is not the platform that will realise the anarchist ideal. But we are here putting forward a party platform: it is an absurdity. A party cannot realise the anarchist ideal. So comrades, let us prepare the ground for this ideal instead, and make a better world for all in the process!

- Comrade Ryke

So you're proposing to federate the Republic into numerous Soviets. I'd like to see the idea fleshed out more. How many administrative levels would there be between the local Soviets and the Central Government? Are we talking something like county Soviet to regional Soviet to state Soviet to central government here? Also how much power would these Soviets have? Would the highest Soviet representatives form a legislative body? Do all the lower Soviets act as local legislative bodies for their jurisdictions whose laws must comply with those higher up? How much power will the Central Government retain? In effect will this transform the VSVR from a unitary state to a federal or even confederate one?
 
Polls are now closed.
 
Here are the final results people. As ever, it is extremely close.

Workers' Vote

Percentages:

Marxist-Leninists: 28.535%
Anarchists: 26.185%
Militarists: 18.425%
Moderates: 18%
Independents: 8.855%

Seats:

Marxist-Leninists: 14
Anarchists: 13
Militarists: 9
Moderates: 9
Independents: 5

Party Vote

Total Vote - 64 votes - 5 votes above the previous best, good show!

Independents: 21
Anarchists: 18
Marxist-Leninists: 16
Militarists: 6
Moderates: 3


Percentages:

Independents: 32.813%
Anarchists: 28.125%
Marxist-Leninists: 25%
Militarists: 9.375%
Moderates: 4. 687%


Seats

Independents: 16
Anarchists: 14
Marxist-Leninists: 13
Militarists: 5
Moderates: 2

Final Total

Anarchists: 27
Marxist-Leninsts: 27
Independents: 21
Militarists: 14
Moderates: 11


These extraordinary results leave us in a pecular position. It is impossible for a coalition to be formed that will gain over 50 seats. The Moderates would probably join either the M-Ls or Independents but would never join a coalition including the Anarchists or Militarists and no one would join a coalition with the Militarists other than the M-Ls. On top of thise the Anarchists and M-Ls would, obviously, not join together. With an absolute majority coalition impossible I shall give the Chairmanship to the coalition that can muster the largest number of seats:

Kropotkin of the Anarchists is the new Chairman of the VSVR with an Anarchist-Independent coalition in power with 48 of 100 seats in the Constituent Assembly.

Needless to say the new coalition is going to struggle without a majority. But if you are an Anarchist or a Right Independent then rejoice! After 3 decades of being the nearly men of Republican politics the Anarchists have got their man in the top job whilst the new force that is the Independents have exploded to become the 3rd largest faction despite being so lacking in popular support.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.