I will respond just to these two because they are essential in this
debate and I am tired of arguing with you, quantumgravity and gnuser.
În 2014-01-05 11:32, aaz...@mail.ru a scris:
My logic is flawless, I just have other definition of anarchy. If
so-called "anarchistic society" has any hierarchical trees, then it's
not anarchy in my opinion.
Nobody can fight for pure
abstract freedom. In fact, people fight for their needs and desires.
Just like with "free software", you have your own definitions of
"freedom" and "anarchy". I don't. I use mainstream definitions which are
the result of long (years, tens of years, centuries or even millennia
of) complex analytical processes and make human communication easy.
These mainstream definitions are the Free Software Definition of the GNU
project (which Trisquel project uses according to its guidelines), and
"freedom" and "anarchy" meanings from dictionary, Wiktionary, and
Wikipedia.
As I already stated, it's not freedom if you are free to hurt others.
That is power over others. Freedom is about balance in community, equal
rights in society. In Romanian there is a saying, "your freedom ends
when my freedom begins" („libertatea ta se termină acolo unde începe
libertatea mea”).
Also, "anarchy" doesn't mean lack of hierarchies, just lack of central
hierarchy spanning over all community. An "anarchy" without smaller
hierarchical groups cannot exist because a group needs to organize
itself, meaning some members of the group have to take leadership, and
tell others what to do in order to survive/prevail in their mission.
--
Tiberiu C. Turbureanu
Președinte, Fundația Ceata
Telefon: +40-761-810-100
GPG: 8B51 53CB 354E 3049 FAE9 3260 F033 8452 4154 1967
Susții libertatea artelor și tehnologiilor?
Înscrie-te ca membru! (http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri)
