Tedster, please consider joining my new group HERCULANEUM: A PLACE FOR MEN. Herculaneum is a group where men can discuss and explore the ideas, goals, demands, ethics, sexuality, and nature of manhood and masculinity. It is a place where we are free to be ourselves, and discuss the issues most important to our identities as men.
I have already started two discussions to get us going: How do we define manhood in the 21st century? and Rites of Passage: A Lost Ritual?.
This is a private group, and discussions can be viewed by members only. Membership is open to men only. Please check it out.
The reason I say "there could be a god, but I see insufficient evidence", even though this is the norm among atheists, is that if I don't qualify my viewpoint up front, then I get Christians saying "Well, your belief takes just as much faith as mine" or "How can you be so certain there is no God?". So, I find it easier to explain my position up front and I think it makes some Christians a little more open to what I have to say. In their minds, all atheists are strong atheists who say "There is no God. Period. End of Story."
"Libertarian, as it is often understood in the US, isn't really my primary focus, because it often still allows certain hierarchies to go unchecked."--not really. its all about checks and balances between two houses. unless you could tell me a way how it might go unchecked in some parts
"In anarchy, which means no leader,"--what happens if a society all randomly agrees to no leader, but then one, just one person decides that they are the new leader and claims something like land or roads or buildings as their own as the new leader? who would check that? the people? if the people, then the people would be the leader of their own society, then it really would have a leader. if that makes sense?
"all hierarchy gets challenged."--as it should i try to do that on a the daily. my form of checking.
"My main focus is being allowed to focus work towards what I think needs to be done, without jeopardizing my survival. In other words, selling widgets or being involved in a service industry that have little relevance to survival, and but is unavailable to me does not come from a justifiable type of society."--what does that mean , could you give me another example? i think you mean, you dont want anyone in society to create a business and sell junk like big mouth billy bass toys, like the shit that no one needs and it usually ends of breaking in a month or sooner, right?
this is a deep convo, it's dope.
While I would like to wake up one morning to find that we have an anarchist society, I don't expect it in at this point of time either. One of the problems of not supporting an idea because it is unachievable is that it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
Anarchism is a philosophy which certain elements many people practice. Food Not Bombs usually will set up at a place without permits, even when it is required or a demonstration may be held without permit; collectives will develop but their is no leader.