Natural doesn’t mean peaceful or pleasant. Nature is jam packed with violence and conflict. The universe is an exceptionally violent place, that is natural.
Arguments appealing to nature are nonsensical to begin with.
Animals murder and assault each other in nature. That is “natural” too. Doesn’t mean it’s what we should strive to either.
I think when appealing to nature is being used as argument, it has to be backed up by consequentialist principle, that there should not be any harm inflicted to anyone.
To give examples, one could say homosexuality is natural, but as long as both parties consent, it should not be an issue. However, in the case of paedophilia despite being natural, the child is getting hurt. A Jewish Roman historian noted that children in a pederastic relationship clearly don’t like it.
The nature argument is used most prominently by conservatives and religious people to say homosexuality is bad (though I know scientifically it exists in animals too).
The nature argument is used precisely by the people who don’t use the harm principle and instead brute force assert divine mysticism (christians, muslims mostly).
Can you send the source for that historian thing, I’d be interested.
Can you send the source for that historian thing, I’d be interested.
I’ve read it from Reddit AskHistorians long ago, and knowing Reddit search capability, it would be hard to find the exact post.
For what it’s worth, I think the name of the Jewish Roman historian was Josephus. A quick Internet search would mention his name and his views and observations of pederastic culture of ancient Romans and Greeks.
Isn’t the natural order, chaos?
At least lawlessness anyway.Isn’t chaos just order on a scale to large to comprehend by the individual?
Maybe. Chaos will have governing rules, like physics. But no control, guidance, or planing. Things just do what they can do.
The natural, the real, everything like that doesn’t exist and have never existed. Thousand years ago we made bananas lose their seeds and we changed how society works I don’t know how many times.
If we didn’t created something, we changed it until it’s unrecognisable.
The closest thing to the natural order is feudal warlordism, which is violent enforcement for its own sake.
Also, nothing is stopping you from starting a co-op, or a commune in a capitalist country, you are allowed to do it. If you tried to practice capitalism in a communist country, communism would be violently enforced upon you.
Someone hasn’t read Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid. That book absolutely tears this argument apart and argues that cooperation is actually natural and competition is not as important to humans.
I love that you thought this was a rebuttal. Some people never questioned the first lies they were told as a child.
What’s the lie? In general, throughout written history (and even before), humanity has been tribal and violent.
The fact that we live in one of the most peaceful times in recorded history is a pretty damning statement on our past behavior.
The stone age was not nearly as violent as the movies make it out to be.
The fact that a few violent psychopaths managed to subjugate large sections of society doesn’t make it anymore natural than claiming natural order of bovine is to live in a factory farm.
It was right in front of you the whole time. All you had to do was start questioning the first lies you were told as a child and not to accept them as gospel.
You have still not answered the question: what’s the lie?
they did. you’re illiterate.
Since you seem to be way more intelligent than me (it’s a miracle I managed to write this
postcomment, being illiterate). Could you explain the lie to me? Please be direct and use simple phrases, as if I were a 5 year old. Otherwise I might get lost in the full display of your intellect.
Tankies like tanks.
Helis like helicopters
How is this related to anarchism? Capitalism is just an easy, but also easy to exploit economic system, while anarchism is a form of government. Those are completely different categories.
If, for example, someone switched the usa or russia to socialism right now, their government would still be full of corrupt fascist scum exploiting regular people.
Capitalism is an hierarchy, which anarchism opposes. Saying anarchism is a form of government is like saying transparent is a colour.
They did try to switch russia to socialism. It worked for like 2 years before the people in power decided they want to stay in power. And so it was no longer socialism.
transparent is absolutely a color. i just move the alpha channel to 0% to pick transparent on my phone.
same with anarchism.
Agreed but the exact same can be said for communism where thousands went against the wall merely for speaking up or even being able to speak up
