Nonarchy.

[Kludge]

What is it?

Original material only. ;) :p

[heavenlyboy34]

I give up, what is it? 9 rulers? :confused:

[eOs]

the freedom to do nothing. and only nothing

20 bucks i hear can buy a sweet sweet computer

[FunkBuddha]

The belief that government is merely a figment of man's collective imagination?

[priest_of_syrinx]

Nonarchy = rule by 9, like a nonagon...


Maybe not?

[Objectivist]

Nonarchy? Hmm, somebody has been spending time at the Mises Forum.

[Kludge]

Nonarchy? Hmm, somebody has been spending time at the Mises Forum.

Idunno who. Conza was dropping the word weeks ago and I suddenly remembered having no idea what he was talking about at the time.

[Objectivist]

Idunno who. Conza was dropping the word weeks ago and I suddenly remembered having no idea what he was talking about at the time.

Google "nonarchy"

[Kludge]

Google "nonarchy"

Website 1: Internal Server Error

Website 2: Internal Server Error

Website 3: Mises forum post -- seemingly irrelevant

Website 4: Free Liberal blog post -- seemingly irrelevant (though it does drop a name of a "nonarchist theorist")

Website 5: Library catalog giving info on "Marxism and humanist nonarchy"

Website 6: Technocrati link to Website 1/2 (Internal Server Error)

Website 7: French website...

Website 8: Web stats on Website 4

Website 9: Library catalog giving info on "Marxism and humanist nonarchy"

Website 10: "Melwyn "non-archy work for a change" hey yea its tHe dOk.. with his goon.. for some LAN GAMMINg Half Life-2 , modd... im gonna be calling it Modworld... doks oddisy...

let me know what this goon needs....????

http://img131.exs.cx/img131/8359/melwynside3rv.jpg



Cheers!!!

[ Added: Fri Jan 07, 2005 4:55 pm ]
Oh btw soulstation is my alt. ALIAS.... so don't worry... :wink:"

[brandon]

Probably just means the same thing as anarchy.

The root ward is "archy", and the prefixes "an" and "non" both negate the word they modify.

[silverhawks]

I give up, what is it? 9 rulers? :confused:

Statelessness. It's an alternative name for anarchy, without the negative connotations.

[FunkBuddha]

Probably just means the same thing as anarchy.

The root ward is "archy", and the prefixes "an" and "non" both negate the word they modify.

Here's a new one. Anonymarchy... Rule by anonymous people.

[heavenlyboy34]

Statelessness. It's an alternative name for anarchy, without the negative connotations.

I prefer autarchy. It makes more sense in the context of proper English. :cool::D

[heavenlyboy34]

Here's a new one. Anonymarchy... Rule by anonymous people.

I believe the proper spelling would be anonarchy. (though I've never put thought to it, I'll admit.)

[Conza88]

Are Libertarians "Anarchists"? by Murray N. Rothbard (http://mises.org/story/2801)

I refuse to be associated with traditional socialists, because I'm not that dumb. Why would I associate myself with a label that has been trashed because of scum like that? Tools who want to get rid of the state, because they think it protects private property, ROFL! By it's mere existence, it has to violate it. Tools, who violate the non aggression axiom (principle) and private property rights.



"We must conclude that the question "are libertarians anarchists?" simply cannot be answered on etymological grounds. The vagueness of the term itself is such that the libertarian system would be considered anarchist by some people and archist by others. We must therefore turn to history for enlightenment; here we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and socialistic elements in their doctrines. Furthermore, we find that all of the current anarchists are irrational collectivists, and therefore at opposite poles from our position.

We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical. On the other hand, it is clear that we are not archists either: we do not believe in establishing a tyrannical central authority that will coerce the noninvasive as well as the invasive. Perhaps, then, we could call ourselves by a new name: nonarchist. Then, when, in the jousting of debate, the inevitable challenge "are you an anarchist?" is heard, we can, for perhaps the first and last time, find ourselves in the luxury of the "middle of the road" and say, "Sir, I am neither an anarchist nor an archist, but am squarely down the nonarchic middle of the road."

So to the dolts here who attack "anarchy", I agree. Pity it is always a strawman, and totally irrelevant to non-archy and anarcho-capitalism. Which is always what I am defending.

I also enjoy asking what books these people have read on the subject. What they know about the system they are attempting to bash. Because the reaction is roughly always the same: intellectual dishonesty - "I haven't read any books, but I'm entitled to my ignorant opinion. I don't want to show my ignorance, so I'll avoid answering the question at all costs."

It's also helpful, because it avoids mentioning a word that has been drilled into peoples heads over decades of indoctrination. From public schools, tv programs, news, media, movies.. and universities. The state can only maintain power through ideology, it is the cloak it raps itself in. It needs the help of the "intellectuals". It falls apart if the populace thinks it shouldn't exist. That simple.

If war is the health of the state, and we know what lengths it goes to. The same goes for the ideological battle.

[tggroo7]

nonarchy is just not really a word. But to answer what is meant from whoever made it up, I think that it is very much like anarchy only with a slight difference. That difference being that nonarchy is not really evident, maybe sort of like "underground." Nonarchy is noncompliance with any authority, but at the same time, not necessarily making it known that you are against the authority. I think it's safe to say that a nonarchist is an anarchist, but an anarchist is not necessarily a nonarchist because anarchist may have the goal of creating a movement of protest and resistance while the nonarchist just lives life avoiding obeying authority.

[idiom]

Its marketing.

Basically Conza is trying to manipulate you with word play.

[Conza88]

Its marketing.

Basically Conza is trying to manipulate you with word play.

Haha, and it worked. ;)

Everyones got an esoteric agenda.

I'm just not a fcken fool - I'm not propagating the enemies talking points.

The socialists have a shitload of them. You use it, you lose, or start considerably behind the 8 ball.

i.e Substitute "voluntary exchange" with say "profit" or better yet: "exploit" - then try convince someone neutral that capitalism is good. :rolleyes:

[heavenlyboy34]

Are Libertarians "Anarchists"? by Murray N. Rothbard (http://mises.org/story/2801)

I refuse to be associated with traditional socialists, because I'm not that dumb. Why would I associate myself with a label that has been trashed because of scum like that? Tools who want to get rid of the state, because they think it protects private property, ROFL! By it's mere existence, it has to violate it. Tools, who violate the non aggression axiom (principle) and private property rights.
So to the dolts here who attack "anarchy", I agree. Pity it is always a strawman, and totally irrelevant to non-archy and anarcho-capitalism. Which is always what I am defending.

I also enjoy asking what books these people have read on the subject. What they know about the system they are attempting to bash. Because the reaction is roughly always the same: intellectual dishonesty - "I haven't read any books, but I'm entitled to my ignorant opinion. I don't want to show my ignorance, so I'll avoid answering the question at all costs."

It's also helpful, because it avoids mentioning a word that has been drilled into peoples heads over decades of indoctrination. From public schools, tv programs, news, media, movies.. and universities. The state can only maintain power through ideology, it is the cloak it raps itself in. It needs the help of the "intellectuals". It falls apart if the populace thinks it shouldn't exist. That simple.

If war is the health of the state, and we know what lengths it goes to. The same goes for the ideological battle.

THANK YOU, conza!! I've been saying this kind of thing for a while, but I hope it sinks in to RPFers now that you've said it too. :cool::D

[heavenlyboy34]

Its marketing.

Basically Conza is trying to manipulate you with word play.

And so is idiom. ;):p

[TurtleBurger]

I prefer autarchy. It makes more sense in the context of proper English. :cool::D

The problem is autarchy sounds just like autarky (economic isolationism), which is a bad thing.

[Conza88]

;)

[mediahasyou]

Here's a new one. Anonymarchy... Rule by anonymous people.

Is that the system we have now? In this democracy, it is never revealed who the actual individuals of the majority are.

Imagine if people knew who voted to steal more of their money? People would act in revenge and the entire system would collapse.

[acptulsa]

Better still, we should start making up words of our own to slam the big government goons with.

Anyone like 'Fedarchy'? That would be a fun one to introduce. Stick it on a vid of congresscritters admitting who really runs the Capitol.

[UnReconstructed]

The belief that government is merely a figment of man's collective imagination?

word

[Theocrat]

What is it?

Original material only. ;) :p

"Nonarchy" just sounds like another term invented by archophobes.

[nayjevin]

non-archy: the practice of engaging with others in a way that leaves total freedom to the individual. no power vested in any one person over any other. See 'Operation Kickstart' http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=200235

[Cowlesy]

Omniarchy?