Read the title that you last responded to. Just because you claim to have the magic recognition of those who you label as Anarchist, does not mean that anyone else could understand your defination.
So if I am to understand you "People of who are incapable of honesty with themselves, people who are immoral, thats the definition of Anarchist, as you label this group of individuals.
The very term anarchist would lead me to believe these type of people would not group up, seems they are against ganging up if they exist as a group?
Sounds like you got hate for what you fear, so to defend your own inabilities, so you choose a label, Anarchist, claim they are a group of liars and immoral people, then pass that message on to others hoping they buy into it?
So anyone who opposes being submissive to dictates of governments are dishonist and immoral?
Would some one that is submissive to groups, gangs, governments that they agree with and give voluntary consent to, but say they do not to majority rule when they are in the minority, still be considered by you to be immoral anarchists?
By the way I do not join gangs and I am offended when somone wants to put some kind of label on me (not that you have as of yet)(still trying to find out who you are attacking, who what real individual people are you calling this label, Anarkkissed I dont want to be ruled and I do not want to rule. Its what I think of as individual freedom. Is that anarchist to your label and does that make me dishonest because I dont belong to any anarchist group or have a desire to?
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise