Re: [WDDM] Anarchism and Direct Democracy

[Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>]

Dear Giorgio,

Please don't go off-topic.

I read the definition of the word anarchy, anarchism etc. in my
English "Oxford Advanced Learner's" Dictionary, and notice that
the definition there doesn't fit to "something that has ruled
mankind's social behaviour for millenia and has been replaced by
democracy just in recent times"

Let's agree, to do so, those people must have given themselves
some kind of social organization, or "..archy" - be it tribe, or
dictatorship, or whatever you like it better, but no arrangement
at all sounds idiotic nonsense.

Now I read in the wikipedia that some people offered another
definition for that word.  Of course feel free to call "cat" a
dog, and "dog"  a horse, as you like it better.

I must admit, the OAL dictionary is fourth edition only, 1989.
Perhaps in a later edition the definition has changed.

Giorgio Menon ha scritto:
> Antonio Rossin wrote:
>
> > Dear Mirek,
> >
> > you did not answer my post.
> > Let me quote what you did not of it:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Well now, I have nothing against some inhabitants of the world who
> > > decide to adopt a different, personal meaning for words that have a
> > > shared meaning by the remaining majority of the inhabitants the
> > > world. But -- if they do so -- they are a sect, not a member of
> > > democracy.
> > >   BTW, I go back to my shareable OAL dictionary, and read under the
> > > item "sect":
> > > - Sect = group of people who share (esp religious) beliefs or
> > > opinions which differ from those of most people.
>
> Dear Antonio,
> i cannot understand your refusal to accept anarchy as something that
> has ruled mankind's social behaviour for millenia and has been
> replaced by democracy just in recent times, after the creation of the
> elites (elites, mind you, allow top-down and bottom-up, impossible in
> anarchy).
> About sect: your definition perfectly fits neurologists (among
> others), seems to me. Are you a member of that sect? Does it feel
> wrong, weird or else? How can a member of that sect actively
> partecipate to DD, if i may ask? Why can neurologists partecipate but
> anarchists cannot?
>
> Regards
>
> Giorgio
>
> PS my compliments to Mirek for the clarity of his post and position.
> Noble and democratic are postive attributs forged in the workshops of
> nobles and democrats (guess why?) while anarchy (maybe) represents a
> direct threat to those workshops drop forging words and minds.