Mal is an anarchist by amnesiack

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Mal is an anarchist

POSTED BY: AMNESIACK
UPDATED: Monday, October 11, 2004 07:22
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4483
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:27 AM

Anarchists generally have a very negative reputation in our society. I've known several however, and Mal fits the profile almost perfectly. The generally accepted definition of an anarchist (without the unfair conotations placed on them by our society) is: A person who seeks to abolish government and base society on voluntary cooperation.

Discuss.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 12:15 PM

CREVANREAVER

I don't think Mal is that extreme to be a full-blown anarchist. Besides, anarchist are traditionally oppose to capitalism and Mal certainly is a capitalist.

In another thread I've written how I think Malcolm Reynolds would probably qualify as an Anarcho-Capitalist, which is essentially an extreme form of Capitalist-Libertarianism.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=5968&m=96544#96544

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 12:16 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

The entire definition ( at least according to this website ) is :

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Anarchism

Anarchism is a generic term describing various political philosophies and social movements that advocate the elimination of social hierarchy. These philosophies use anarchy to mean a society based on voluntary cooperation of free individuals. Philosophical anarchist thought does not intend to advocate chaos or anomie — it intends "anarchy" to refer to a manner of human relations that is intentionally established and maintained.

While individual freedom and opposition to the state are primary tenets of anarchism, most anarchists insist that anarchism is much more than that. There is also considerable variation between the anarchist political philosophies, to the point that groups with radically different views may consider themselves anarchist, at the same time denying that other points of view should be called anarchist. Two areas where opinions vary widely are the role of violence in society, and the role of property and/or economics. Egalitarianism is a present, but lesser subject of debate.

Now, the way I read it, the idea is to eliminate the drawbacks of a " social hierarchy " in order to better improve the lot of the general population.

One example would be the base differences between healthcare in the United States compared to the ideals of the Canadian system. While both systems have their merits, it is obvious that if you have more wealth , you are higher in the social hierarchy and have better access to treatment in the United States. In Canada with its public healthcare system, everyone pays in and everyone is ( in theory at least ) on a level playing field to gain services. In this example, the Wealthy on one end of the scale will complain about wait times, lack of service, etc, while the poor at the other end ( low income, etc ) are gratefull that they recieve service at a price they can afford.

Another example would be the British army of say the 1800's. To be an officer you had to come from the proper family, have the right connections, and have the cash to purchase a commision. Competence was rarely an issue, and diaster occured frequently. An example of the complete opposite would be the American military of the 1810-1815. Many of the company level ( and sometimes higher )officers were elected by their men, the popular officers were the ones who were easiest upon their men and this also had some tragic results.

I would consider myself somewhat of an Anarchists as I believe that government should limit itself to providing a limited array of services and other wise stay out of a persons life.

A social order or hierarchy is a nessersary evil in some cases, but it shouldn't rule our lives in others. I think Mal with his experiences, if he got past his bitterness, would have a similar opinion.

" If I going to get killed for a word....
Then my word is Poon-Tang "

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 2:25 PM

CORWYN

I disagree. I see no evidence that Mal wants to abolish government (after all, he did fight for one.) Rather I see that he would like to get rid of the CURRENT government.

Can't say I blame him, I've had similar thoughts myself...

Thank You Kindly.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 3:30 PM

SHINYSEVEN

I don't think Mal has *any* coherent political philosophy, he's just very hacked off at things in general.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 3:35 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by amnesiack:
Anarchists generally have a very negative reputation in our society. I've known several however, and Mal fits the profile almost perfectly. The generally accepted definition of an anarchist (without the unfair conotations placed on them by our society) is: A person who seeks to abolish government and base society on voluntary cooperation.

Discuss.

I disagree. I see Mal as more of a extreme Libertarian, not an Anarchist. Extreme, based on the events of his history, as being on the losing end of one particular war.

Mal clearly isn't in favor of the Alliance, but I can't see where that view would hold over to ALL Gov'ts. just my 2 cents.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 5:02 PM

ZOID

CrevanReaver wrote:

Quote:
...In another thread I've written how I think Malcolm Reynolds would probably qualify as an Anarcho-Capitalist, which is essentially an extreme form of Capitalist-Libertarianism.

I personally believe he's an Anarcho-Syndicalist, and that Serenity is his commune. Evidence: the card game for sh*t details played by Jayne, Simon and Book. River doesn't have to do chores because she's 'been touched by the gods' and is their shamanesse.

Mal doesn't have to engage in mundane tasks himself, because Serenity is his kingdom. As Mal himself so eloquently put it:

Quote:
...The Lady of the Lake-- her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur (his revolver) from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, (Malcolm), was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your king!

To which Wash responds:

Quote:
WASH: Listen: Strange women lying in ponds distributing (firearms) is no basis for a system of government! Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some... farcical aquatic ceremony!

MALCOLM: (yelling) BE QUIET!

WASH: You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a (pistol) at you!!

MALCOLM: (coming forward and grabbing the pilot) Shut *UP*!

WASH: I mean, if I went 'round, saying I was an emperor, just because some moistened bink had lobbed a (hog's leg) at me, they'd put me away!

MALCOLM: (throwing the cosmonaut around) Shut up, will you, SHUT UP!

WASH: Aha! Now we see the violence inherent in the system!

MALCOLM: SHUT UP!

WASH: (yelling to all the other glorious sp'workers) Come and see the violence inherent in the system! HELP, HELP, I'M BEING REPRESSED!

So, Serenity is clearly an anarcho-syndicalist commune, with only Mal suffering delusions of standing.

And may God strike me down were it to be otherwise...

Montyly,

zoid

P.S.
Don't stand there gawping, like you've never seen the Hand of God before!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 5:06 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Can I be the guy with the coconuts? Pleeeeeeeze.

There are three kinds of people: fighters, lovers, and screamers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 5:41 PM

ZOID

SoupCatcher:

You got it, 'Patsy'...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 6:25 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Woohoo!!

Now I must go practice...

------------------------

Nature has infinite variety. Straight lines? Not so much

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 7:15 PM

AMNESIACK

Quote:
Originally posted by CORWYN: I disagree. I see no evidence that Mal wants to abolish government (after all, he did fight for one.)

Did he? To my understanding, the Browncoats were a group that fought against the formation of the Alliance, but not necessarily for any other specific government.

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYSEVEN: I don't think Mal has *any* coherent political philosophy, he's just very hacked off at things in general.

I agree that I don't think Mal would say he's an anarchist. That doesn't mean that his outlook doesn't line up with anarchist philosophy, however.

Even during the war, Mal displayed a complete willingness to disregard any rules and procedures that didn't suit him. As the Captain of Serenity he undertakes many tasks and jobs that would be illegal regardless of whether the Alliance or a local government was in charge.

And there's always this classic line: "That's what governments are for. Get in a man's way."

Keep in mind I'm not in any way implying that being an anarchist or derivitive thereof is a bad thing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 7:40 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

Mind you in Buskwacked he seemed to approve the fact that the Alliance was sending medicine to Paradiso.

I think Mal approves of limited government, as long as it helps and does not get in ones way

" If I going to get killed for a word....
Then my word is Poon-Tang "

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 9, 2004 7:45 PM

AMNESIACK

Well, as you and I have both pointed out, many anarchists are generally very receptive of voluntary cooperation and working with other people to accomplish tasks. Mal doesn't like to see ordinary people suffer; I don't think it really mattered to him where the medicine came from, if it was helping people. But when he didn't know that it was relief for the suffering, he was more pleased to be lifting goods that belonged directly to the government.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 10, 2004 4:16 AM

LUPINADDAMS

All this thread made me think of was;

"I thought we were an autonomous collective!"
"Now we see the violence inherent in the system... Help! Help! I'm being repressed!!"
- Monty Python & the Holy Grail

"You are what you do."
Andrew Vacchs

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:19 AM

CORNCOBB

Mal probably hasn't even heard of Anarchists but certainly does live like one. He lives by his own rules,getting by through co-operation with others. He has a rebellious, anti-authoritarian streak as long as my hairy arm. comments such as "that's what governments do: get in a mans way" seem to indicate he is no big fan of governments in general. Yep, Mal is an Anarchist. And isn't that one of the things we love him for?

oh, and the negative conotations that are usually attached to the word 'anarchist' really bug me. The media seems to think 'anarchist' is interchangable with 'terrorist', conveniantly fogetting that anarchism is a pacifist movement. If they were so blatantly descriminatory towards any other political philosophy they'd probably get sued.

"Gorramit Mal... I've forgotten my line."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 10, 2004 11:48 PM

MANTICHORUS

Mal is definitely NOT anarchist, as part of the anarchistic belief is that all people are inheritantly good. I believe Mal's experience would have shown him some pretty compelling evidence that not all people are inheritantly good (e.g. Adelai Niska).

__________________________________________________
Zoë Warren: "At last, we can retire and give up this life of crime." (after breaking into a practically empty bank safe, from the Serenity trailer.)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 11, 2004 7:01 AM

CORWYN

Quote:
the Browncoats were a group that fought against the formation of the Alliance, but not necessarily for any other specific government.

They had uniforms, command structure, authorizations, ergo government. They were the independent planets, planetary governments implied, in my opinion.

Quote:
He lives by his own rules, getting by through co-operation with others. He has a rebellious, anti-authoritarian streak as long as my hairy arm.

Ah, but he makes others live by his rules too. He has no problems with authority if it is him "we don't vote on my ship, because my ship is not the rutting town hall", "you might not want to mistake it for a suggestion".

Quote:
part of the anarchistic belief is that all people are inheritantly good.

I don't think that is true for all anarchists. And even so I think it would be better phrased as "people acting in their own best interests will cooperate with others".

Quote:
Zoë Warren: "At last, we can retire and give up this life of crime." (after breaking into a practically empty bank safe, from the Serenity trailer.)

Please mark spoilers. Some of us wish to see the movie unaffected by such things. Thank You.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 11, 2004 7:22 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Umm.

Not all Anarchists are pacifists, for damned sure I am not.

But yes, Anarchism gets a bad name - mutual cooperation is almost instinctive for mankind as an evolved critter, and it takes decades of training at the hands of our ruinous and destructive society to beat it out of em.

Every man for himself is non-civilized, non-social, and in the end non-productive, really, if someone asked for a little help from you, when you were not busy with something else, that would take two minutes and cost you little or no effort or resources - what IS your gut instinct, your knee jerk reaction ?

For most folk it's "Hey, sure."

Anarchism isn't about social destruction, it's about society working from the bottom up, not the top down.

Folks wish to protect things, they make rules - over time those rules somehow become more important than what they were supposed to protect, then distorted further in human corruption and the quest for power and control - and at that point, those rules have no more use or value and should be tossed on the junk heap.

NOW does everyone get it, right from the horses mouth ?
(or other part of anatomy, as my girl is fond of remarking...)

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE