Mal is an anarchist

POSTED BY: amnesiack
UPDATED: Monday, October 11, 2004 17:22
VIEWED: 5447
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE

AMNESIACK

Saturday, October 9, 2004 8:27 PM

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.

CREVANREAVER

Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:15 PM

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

GINOBIFFARONI

Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:16 PM

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 "

CORWYN

Sunday, October 10, 2004 12:25 AM

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.

SHINYSEVEN

Sunday, October 10, 2004 1:30 AM

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

AURAPTOR

Sunday, October 10, 2004 1:35 AM

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. "

ZOID

Sunday, October 10, 2004 3:02 AM

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!

SOUPCATCHER

Sunday, October 10, 2004 3:06 AM

Can I be the guy with the coconuts? Pleeeeeeeze.

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

ZOID

Sunday, October 10, 2004 3:41 AM

SoupCatcher:

You got it, 'Patsy'...

SOUPCATCHER

Sunday, October 10, 2004 4:25 AM

Woohoo!!

Now I must go practice...

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

Nature has infinite variety. Straight lines? Not so much

1 2 NEXT PAGE