Re: virus: Re: Virus: Sociological Change
Tue, 24 Dec 96 10:24:07 GMT

>From flaps

>> lawlessness,
>The whole point of anarchy, IMO
>> misrule.
>Interesting! I would consider anarchy to be lack of rule, and thus there
>would be no place for misrule. Any thoughts on this?

I would have thought that a lack of rule still means that there are still rules present otherwise instead of saying a lack of rule there would be no rule at all
This means that is is possible to have a lack of rule and misrule all at the same time. This is when true anarchy would occur.(When the rules that do exist are not adhered to and other areas that require rules are ignored.)

That was from a small list of synonyms, so it's not really part of the

Anarchy, of course, 'an-archos', without leaders, so I suppose a true
democracy is a memetic anarchy... ;-)

>> *********************************************************
>> Wade T. Smith |'There ain't nothin' you
>> | shouldn't do to a dog.'
> ^^^
> Is this correct? If so, I didn't
> realise that you were into that kind
> of thing ;)

Well, I'm not, but I don't hold it against anyone....

----- End Included Message -----