Mad Max social tribes are not anarchy, they are an establishment of some kind of order (feudal, dictator, empaneled) in the wake of societal collapse/rejection (anarchy).
And the black flag waving capital A anarchists are Socialist. Socialist Anarchy. They still want universal healthcare with a decentralized governance.
When anarchy finally arrives, the anarchists are always the first to die.
It would more accurately be characterized as "every man for himself," which is hypocritical because the so-called anarchists insist on their "right" to tear down the social structure and still be protected by it. With the true implementation of anarchy, I could cave in their skulls on a whim and there'd be nothing they could do about it. Unless they organized ...
There are four left - here are two of them in their own words on their live massacre cam or whatever they are calling it:
I don’t know the man, but this is not exactly a flattering representation of Mr. Anderson - the main speaker in previous video:
This article is correct about one thing - the scale between government and freedom and order and anarchy. There are many people on this site that express blind support for the individuals in this video, but more people should listen to them and try to figure out what they are about. They have called the government illegal, said they don’t recognize the government, and they claim to have the right to do what they want (i.e. - camp on public land while armed). That by it’s very nature is anarchy. Little wonder that other anti-government groups have largely distanced themselves from this from the beginning. I have listened to what they are saying and everyone - including the “leader” of this stand-off has asked them to leave. Watch the video and ask yourself if these are people you want to associate with. The blind support given to these men who conduct an armed takeover (a wildlife refuge of all things?) of property that is not theirs in a state where they don’t reside is not representative of conservatism in my opinion.
You said above:
“”Mad Max social tribes are not anarchy, they are an establishment of some kind of order (feudal, dictator, empaneled) in the wake of societal collapse/rejection (anarchy).””
I believe you are correct about this, so you must ask yourself what is the “new order” you would like to live in. Is it a commune full of men like this who are largely rejected by others who also claim to be “anti-government patriots??
You claim that all anarchist are Socialist. I would respectfully disagree. While “anarchist” are often socialist here in the U.S. and Europe there are plenty of “far right” anarchists and I believe the video above depicts two of them. The claims and stated desires of this group have been muddled from the beginning if you have listened to what they said. The rush to support person(s) who are anti-government must take into consideration the alternative that they offer as well as the popular support for such alternative within a community. That never existed in this situation beyond their original claim that the sentence of the Hammonds was too harsh (I think most likely agree).
Most of the same posters here on FR calling people who question the means and methods of this group “bootlickers” have repeatedly refused to comment on the video I posted above or research the “holdouts” who still remain. If one is going to ignore numerous laws that have existed for a century or longer shouldn’t one be able to articulate why?
The “demands” of this group were never clear - some said they wanted the land turned over to ranchers - some said they wanted the land turned over to the state (as if the state of Oregon would turn a migratory bird sanctuary into a pasture for the benefit of a few ranchers) - some said the governments land claims were illegal.
There is nothing black and white about these claims historically, legally, or in the court of popular opinion.
My personal opinion is that I would like to see much of the land owned (yes owned - they purchased it for the nation) by the government in the West turned over to local management, but BLM will just be replaced by the Oregon Department of Ecology or some other entity of government and it is unlikely much would change - they will not make everyone happy. The States could also sell some of the land to finance state government, but the “states” that purchased the land long ago are on the East Coast so one could argue endlessly about who receives the money. I don’t see how that benefits the ranchers in this occupation because they can’t afford the land - it would be the big agri-corporations that would purchase it or foreign investors.
This is a convoluted mess and I don’t think anything the Bundy’s did in this situation advanced their cause or garnered public support for their views. They inspired contempt among most of the public if you read the comments to these articles on other sites. They also set back public opinion of “militia” groups and the longer the hold-outs remain the more damage will be done. The last 4 say they will come out if they won’t be arrested. Good luck with that.
“And the black flag waving capital A anarchists are Socialist. Socialist Anarchy. “
Apparently anarchy means whatever you think it means.