Stavrogin_'s forum posts
First of, lol the philosophy isn't mine, i'm not an illegalist either. Second, yes, illegalism is a product of capitalism. Illegalists state that they've become what they've become because of the corruption and oppressive character of the system, AND our inability to change it. Illegalism is somewhat connected with anarchism, which as a philosohpy, wants total and ultimate freedom.[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"]
[QUOTE="Frattracide"]
You have misquoted me. In context, what I said was that criminals are just as dependent on social conventions as anyone else.
And that was my whole point. Criminals depend on the social sanction of justice and the rule of law (The former being more important than the latter) to survive. If those institutions did not exist, then they would be killed by the mob at their first crime. We refrain from murdering criminals because of our ideals of justice, and we have institutions to prevent vigilantism. Criminals are protected just like everyone else.
The problem I have with your "philosophy" that it requires the existence of social mores it advocates against.
An illegalist, so far as I have understood the term, stipulates that they should break laws with respect to society while everyone else should obey laws with respect to them. One cannot be a criminal outside this context. A criminal obviously doesn't care, as most people who commit crime do so for pragmatic reasons. Most criminals would, I suspect, admit that they maintain these expectations. But the thug who dresses his actions up in this feigned nobility and gives it a name like "illegalism" is, as I have said earlier, a solipsist- he knows his argument is wrong, but he uses it anyway.
This is the rhetoric of cowards.
Frattracide
The difference is, as i said before illegalism states that freedom by revolution is not possible (revolutions devour their own children) and you're always going to have masters and slaves. So instead of rolling over with it, individual revolt happens by saying: i'm going to reclaim my own freedom. This has to do a lot with egoism and nihilism, a good book that explains it nicely is "The Ego and its Own". I recommend it.
;)
I should note that I am in no way being hostile here, sometimes my writing comes off like that and if that is the case I apoplgize.
I meant "your" in the rhetorical sense (as in you are the one presenting this idea) I did not mean that you adhere to the idea. I don't really care why illegalist say they are illegalists, they're still dumb.
I'll make you a deal: If you read "The Leviathan" By Hobbs and "The social contract" by Rousseau, I'll read your book. Hell, I'll even lend you my copies.
I read the Leviathan not so long ago, i haven't read Rosseau though (it rhymes). Back on topic, although i agree most criminals today are just stupid, that doesn't mean that illegalism as a philosophy is stupid. What is wrong for the individual is "right" for the state and the people in power, the author of the book i recommended you has said that the state calls its own violence law, but that of the individual crime. That's why it's wrong to kill for your own benefit, but right to drop cluster bombs under the pretense that you're doing it for my (our) own good and safety. And illegalism, this term was coined back in the 19th century i think, so it does look kinda pretentious if you refer to a local thug as an illegalist.First of, lol the philosophy isn't mine, i'm not an illegalist either. Second, yes, illegalism is a product of capitalism. Illegalists state that they've become what they've become because of the corruption and oppressive character of the system, AND our inability to change it. Illegalism is somewhat connected with anarchism, which as a philosohpy, wants total and ultimate freedom.You have misquoted me. In context, what I said was that criminals are just as dependent on social conventions as anyone else.
And that was my whole point. Criminals depend on the social sanction of justice and the rule of law (The former being more important than the latter) to survive. If those institutions did not exist, then they would be killed by the mob at their first crime. We refrain from murdering criminals because of our ideals of justice, and we have institutions to prevent vigilantism. Criminals are protected just like everyone else.
The problem I have with your "philosophy" that it requires the existence of social mores it advocates against.
An illegalist, so far as I have understood the term, stipulates that they should break laws with respect to society while everyone else should obey laws with respect to them. One cannot be a criminal outside this context. A criminal obviously doesn't care, as most people who commit crime do so for pragmatic reasons. Most criminals would, I suspect, admit that they maintain these expectations. But the thug who dresses his actions up in this feigned nobility and gives it a name like "illegalism" is, as I have said earlier, a solipsist- he knows his argument is wrong, but he uses it anyway.
This is the rhetoric of cowards.
Frattracide
The difference is, as i said before illegalism states that freedom by revolution is not possible (revolutions devour their own children) and you're always going to have masters and slaves. So instead of rolling over with it, individual revolt happens by saying: i'm going to reclaim my own freedom. This has to do a lot with egoism and nihilism, a good book that explains it nicely is "The Ego and its Own". I recommend it.
;)
Criminals are no more free than anyone else in society.FrattracideThere are free in a way that they don't have to abide the laws everyone else does and don't have to wait for the institutions of the state do fight for their "justice"... Simple example, someone does you wrong, instead of suing him and dragging yourself to court and probably lose, you could just beat the crap out of him, extort him or kill him. It isn't justice from a neutral point of view, but in his eyes (the individual) it is, because it benefits him and his ego. Yes, solipsism, somewhat. It also isn't moral, but what is morality? Certainly objective morality doesn't exist, even if it does, it doesn't make the illegalists hypocrites. A part of the "illegalist doctrine" is immorality.
What is particularly interesting about illegalism in our capitalistic societies is that through its media, capitalism in a way adopts illegalism through Hollywood crime films, and serves us with heroic stories about individuals going from rags to riches and (because of their courage) rise above the system. Thus, the everyday Joe, while watching movies about illegalists in some way lives out his heroic dream, so those films serve as a kind of а buffer (cushion) for the possible criminality as a consequence of the illegalist doctrine...
Because all laws prevent us from being happy and free people, correct? The vast majority of people have the ability to achieve greatness and wealth if they put in an honest effort, but living a life of crime isn't the most profitable nor free way to live in the slightest bit. You're essentially at the mercy of the law and your associates. All it takes is one call for you to wind up in prison/poverty for life, or in a casket.SetsaWrong. The vast majority doesn't achieve wealth and greatness. The American Dream only serves as opium for the slaves, false hope to keep the modern slaves obedient and employed, waiting for the realization of their dream that will never come... The fact that a few achieved wealth and power through legal means doesn't change the fact that there are over 7 billion people on this planet. As far as honesty goes, Balzac has said "Behind every great fortune is a crime".
I really wouldn't dare to call capitalist giants like Andrew Carnegie and his sort, HONEST. But, he build libraries, so i guess that makes him good and honest in your eyes. Yeah right...
P.S. Steve Jobs anyone?
[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"][QUOTE="Baconbits2004"]No, illegalism doesn't imply blatantly breaking all the laws just for the sake of it, just breaking the ones that try to repress the individual and his well-being. so pedos are illegalists?Yes, they are some sort of illegalists, but they have very little to do with individualism and egoism, which is kinda the point of illegalism...I think I'll have to stick with just breaking SOME laws.
The other ones seem icky, and I don't wanna go about doing them for the sake of doing them. =[
ZumaJones07
No, illegalism doesn't imply blatantly breaking all the laws just for the sake of it, just breaking the ones that try to repress the individual and his well-being.I think I'll have to stick with just breaking SOME laws.
The other ones seem icky, and I don't wanna go about doing them for the sake of doing them. =[
Baconbits2004
There are a lot people who became underworld kingpins but "justice" never caught up with them. Famous examples include Carlo Gambino, Tommy Lucchesse, Meyer Lansky and many more... But that's not the point of illegalism. Even if you do get caught, the time you spent as a free man, whether it was one, two, thirty years you were freer than the ordinary citizen, and that counts for something. Besides, the battle ends in death, you can always try to break out of prison instead of giving up, flee to another country that has no extradition treaty with the country that pursues you etc etc... using the loopholes of the system. There's a saying: It's better to be a lion for a day than a sheep all your life.[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"][QUOTE="Jackc8"]
Seems like a really short-sighted philosophy. You'll probably get caught and thrown in jail, making you the most "mindless law-abiding slave" there is.
Jackc8
Well sure there are people who don't get caught, but there are also over two million people in US prisons who did get caught. If you want to take a survey of those inmates and ask them if they think it was worth it, well, be my guest. It certainly wouldn't be worth it to me.
As far as criminality making a person a "lion" - I don't think my neighbors are home right now, I could probably go over there and steal their stuff. Would that make me a lion? I probably couldn't sell all their stuff for much more than I get paid from my job each week. and by the time I drove around to other towns to try to illegally pawn the stuff, well cripes it would have been easier just to go to work instead and save the court appearances and fines and my wife and kids wondering if I'd flipped my lid or what.
Well, that has more to do with the intelligence (or lack there of) of today's criminals, not illegalism itself. And i'm not talking about robbing your (ours) fellow slaves, although that's an option too. Participating in the gray market also is illegalism, not paying taxes, it doesn't have to include violence.There are a lot people who became underworld kingpins but "justice" never caught up with them. Famous examples include Carlo Gambino, Tommy Lucchesse, Meyer Lansky and many more... But that's not the point of illegalism. Even if you do get caught, the time you spent as a free man, whether it was one, two, thirty years you were freer than the ordinary citizen, and that counts for something. Besides, the battle ends in death, you can always try to break out of prison instead of giving up, flee to another country that has no extradition treaty with the country that pursues you etc etc... using the loopholes of the system. There's a saying: It's better to be a lion for a day than a sheep all your life.Seems like a really short-sighted philosophy. You'll probably get caught and thrown in jail, making you the most "mindless law-abiding slave" there is.
Jackc8
Nice, well first there is a difference between anarchism and illegalism, and their concept of masters and slaves. Anarchism and illegalism ascertain the actual situation in every society: that is that there are masters and slaves. If there is any absolute truth in the history of societies, it is just that, you always had and you'll always have people who rule, and people who are ruled. Whether you call them slave owners and slaves, feudal lords and peasant farmers, owners of corporations and white trash, it's completely the same.
Anarchism is essentially a philosophy of a slavish mentality. It states that we should abolish the concept of slavery, referring to the innate goodness and solidarity of the people (wtf?!). Anarchism doesn't say i want to be a master, it says i want to have no masters, and all should be equal. Illegalism on the other hand, wisely accepts the eternal separation of masters and slaves, and just says, I do not want to be a slave! I want to be a master! However, the jump to power is not simple, and can't be achieved by legal means (the fact that there are a few people who succeeded in a legal way doesn't change my point). The legal system basically means defining and then sanctioning the preexisting state or "defense of the status quo". As such, it is always on the side of lords, in whose interest is to remain masters and the slaves to remain slaves. The natural reaction to such a legal and social system, by anyone who is a slave, but wants to be a master, is illegalism...
Log in to comment