Saturday, July 05, 2008


V for vendetta, saw that movie again some time last week and you have to hand it to the wachowski brothers to ask questions.

Is anarchy a long term solution? Looking at countries like china where dissent is killed easily (literally and figuratively) the larger audience seems to buy the official hard line arguments. How do you decide when a soceity is ready for anarchy?

Should soceities head towarda anarchy at all? I think the question is when and not should. The main concern with anarchy is the physical risk that it entails and hence the pain it could cause to the public at large. Historically anarchists have tended towards anarchy, but violent anarchy need not be the only possible method. For glory or infamy sure.

Why should soceities de generate?
1) They are tired of the atocities of the ruling parties. Anarchy as a protest against authoritarian regimes.
2) Against social order: a student backed cultural revolution to fight a dogmatic soceity
3) To throw away an existing way of life. Credit based life anyone? This is the systemic riskthat any soceity has. Most of the world famous revolutions have occurred as an expansion of initial poclets of anarchy.

Is anarchy set to reign in india? Not in the near future, but in my life time yes. Well educated individuals taking up naxalism is the first mark of a need to reject soceity. We are beginning to have deep geographic and economic schism s across different parts of the country and anarchy can spread llike a virus.

What will happen as an outcome of the resultant revolution? I don't want to know

No comments: