Kid A

I have a fundamental problem in the way I live my life.

I can not effectively deal with people. [they say that you can tell that a person's lying if he doesn't use contractions. It creates a funny paradox in this case. I appear to be lying to myself over something I'm trying to accuse myself of. (Don't be afraid, I'm very lost too)]

You see, this creates a sort of... internal question to myself. How can I claim to love those I do not engage in conversation with? How can I be there to serve everyone if I don't know anyone?

The idea I've been interested in this summer, like all summers, you know, justice and freedom and love, and all that, doesn't work in a one man world. Thinking of it, reading of it, dreaming of it, does nothing if I don't practice it, aye? Well, how can I practice it if I don't deal with anyone?

I've had the flu or something these past couple days. Outside my family, and work, because I had to arrange for someone to cover my shift. I don't really think anyone noticed. This is kind of... worrying. I mean, I'm laying in the bed I made, it's totally my fault.

I understand what I'm doing wrong. I don't know how to be any other way. Herein lays the problem.

I want to be normal. I despise normality. It's a fun paradox to play with.

Thoughts that took nearly a month.

Sorry for the gap. My life hasn't spared me much time.

I've spent some that I have trying to engauge in debate with some people from the a forum I frequent on the topics of anarchy and socialism. I wrote this bit up the other day after a person, for the millionth time, said "Hey, you can't be an anarchist AND a socialist!"

For some reason, I get the impression that you're not quite in the minority in this thread. I don't know if you missed it or not, but it's a topic I don't mind addressing. It seems to me that most people have a very narrow view of communism/socialism and anarchy.

It's not just socialism and anarchy that people are confused of. As demonstrated earlier when a poster falsely welded the ideas of democracy and capitalism at the hip, impossible to be separated, when in reality socialism can be democratic and capitalism can be fascist. From history, we can get a great education, but it is foolish to think that the past must dictate the future. On to the meat and potatoes.

You are correct in your assesment that greed does make communism very difficult to execute on a large scale without a rigid, authoritarian government. Such a government wasn't part of the blueprint, but it was thought of to be an acceptable evil for the common good. But, as Mr. Orwell illustrates for us in Animal Farm, power always corrupts the leaders in such cases to stray from the original ideal into the same old human conditions.

The theme that power corrupts is a popular one to me. It seems to be nearly absolute. History does not offer many examples of a leader who never waivered in his or her quest to satisfy the constituents. Instead, it seems to me that they always know what's best for the people. That the people are petty fools who don't know what's good for themselves. This point is best illustrated in modern day Venezuela and other countries under the control of the communist party. Chavez thinks he alone can solve the nation's problems, that he can bring down what he sees as a morally horrific western culture. While I find some of his views to be agreeable, I do not think he should appoint himself dictator or anything of the sorts. Even though I could say that his economic ideas are somewhat decent, I cannot count myself as a supporter of him because of his actions reguarding elections, etc.

The base for communism is "commune". We all live in communities. In towns, in neighborhoods, in cities, in states. Communities, in my eyes, are not made up and ruled by town councils and police. They are given identity by the people who compose them. From this idea, everyone is different and gives their own unique contribution to the area around them. It also means that one person cannot make up a community. Instead, they are all influenced equally by individuals. This is why I don't think fascism and communism are forever welded at the hip. Stalin would have sent his dogs onto me for saying so, but let's not bind ourselves into history.

You're view into anarchy is also incorrect. Yes, anarchists like myself do want to do away with leaders. However, we do not want society to go away. We're social animals. No one can ever disband society. We can never be locked into small hamster wheels, we'll always find a way out. Do I see our society we live in now as flawed? Yes. But I wish to change it, not do away with it.

My preferred definition of anarchy is life without bosses. In this way, unlike what you say, we are then all equal. If there are no bosses, no one can be bossed around. With no slave masters, everyone is free.

Thoughts?