RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Anarcho-monarchism
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Anarcho-monarchism | Result: Deleted[edit]
Delete[edit]
- We don’t need an article on every anarcho- ideology, I doubt anyone actually believes this one. There’s one somewhat interesting but completely off-mission paragraph about Tolkien, the rest is just a bunch of bullshit (the first citation is urban dictionary). Christopher (talk) 21:36, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
I think I'm ineligible to vote, but yea.Top 4 results from a search for anarcho-monarchism are this article, what appears to be a polandball wiki, urbandictionary, and an article on Tolkien and Salvador Dali. Wikipedia search for the term redirects to "Totalitarian democracy"; I'm halfway convinced this is mostly just a made up term. Serene (talk) 21:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)- Anyone can vote in AfDs, you’re only ineligible for the important stuff (the coop, changes to site policy). See RW:CS#Franchise. Christopher (talk) 21:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm, who created the artic-oh, never mind, my decision has been made...-Flandres (talk) 22:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not worth keeping.
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 23:05, 5 April 2021 (UTC) - Changing my vote to delete after being informed as to how far in the ideological backwoods this is. Having an article is therefore giving these people more attention than they deserve. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kevs Ping! 06:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Just a thought experiment, a way of looking at Briain's constitution from a particular angle. Or something. Yet another theoretical spin-off of anarchism. Nobody needs this pointless waste of time. Avida Dollarsher again 19:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not even a real anarchism ideology; the first source is fucking UrbanDictionary, which already tells me all I need to know about what we're dealing with here. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularR
asoningSee my experiments 19:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC) - Superfluous article. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! /
/ 
/ 
) 21:56, 6 April 2021 (UTC) - Kauri0.o (talk) 22:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep[edit]
- This is a real ideology. Meritocratic hierarchies can and do arise naturally, and in that way best serve the local community. "Anarcho" refers to its existence outside of a traditional monopolistic legislative body. Here is a concise and detailed Anarcho-Monarchist constitution, as well as a 5 minute Youtube Overview of the same. This example proves the ideology is far more complex, sophisticated, genuine, and advanced than to simply be dismissed as a "meme ideology".— Unsigned, by: 206.189.11.198 / talk
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button:
on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Christopher (talk) 22:14, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. Can you address why this is being deleted now? I had just improved upon the page, added a very serious constitutional document, and removed some clearly denigrating comments yesterday. 206.189.11.198 (talk) 22:39, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button:
#Keep, but make it more critical and emphasize that this is an extremely fringe ideology. Also revert the whitewashing moron on sight. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 22:43, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- More critical? Isn't the point of encyclopedias to be as non-critical as possible? What wrongs has this ideology committed, when compared to Marxism or the imperialist USA? "emphasize that this is an extremely fringe ideology." Popularity of an idea doesn't prove or disprove its merits. Einstein's ideas weren't immediately popular, so should we assume they're wrong? "Also revert the whitewashing moron on sight." Something tells me your intentions are not intellectual honesty or freedom of thought/association, but instead to insert your bias into every definition on this site. You need to reflect upon your actions here. 206.189.11.198 (talk) 23:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- This isn't Wikipedia kiddo. RationalWiki is a fact checking/debunking site, not an encyclopedia. As for Anarcho-monarchism... It's feudalism, it's just feudalism. You know, that thing human society rejected in 1700s? It's feudalism and it's built on pseudoscience and crankery. Tough shit if you don't like that. As for my personal interests in this matter, I don't have any. You're a crank, we debunk cranks. It's as simple as that. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- How is it feudalism if there is no monopoly on violence? If the monarch cannot create law? You are confusing absolutist monarchy with anarcho-monarchism. The Vatican is an example of anarcho-monarchism. A Marxist dictator is an example of absolutist monarchism (dictatorship). Which has been a larger historical disaster/failure? "pseudoscience and crankery" Simply labeling it as such does not make it true.206.189.11.198 (talk) 23:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Here we go with the presuppositions, loaded questions, and half baked examples... Sigh... I'm not really interested in debating this, though I'd suggest you actually bother to read Marx. I'd also suggest you bother learning formal critical thinking skills, as you appear mistaken me for a Marxist (I'm not, I'm openly critical of Marx). ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- To put into context how fringe this is, the Anarchist Library, which has over 7500 pieces of anarchist writings, returns exactly 9 results for a search for anarcho-monarchism. Of these, several include the term only in the titles of references, which themselves appear to be among the other 9 entries, and more than one propose it as a more accurate term for "anarcho-capitalism." One of them calls it an aesthetic form of government based on Tolkien. The most serious proposal seems to be for what is essentially just anarchism with a symbolic, but powerless monarch, which to me seems like an awfully minor distinction to warrant its own article. In contrast, we do not have a separate article on anarcho-syndicalism, for instance, which returns more than 50 results and has been addressed by Noam Chomsky. To me, its seems silly to have an article on each branch of anarchism at least as prominent as anarcho-monarchism, and it seems silly to have one on this branch but not on more prominent branches. I think a section in the anarchism article or the anarcho-capitalism article would be more than sufficient to cover this topic, if we are going to keep content on it. I also think it would be difficult to make the article more critical, because there just seems to be very little substance to criticize in the first place. Serene (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Serene Fair enough, I'm swapping my vote to delete. I only really know this as "that thing Hoppe rambles on about from time to time to mask his ethnostate/Neo-Nazi views". ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- To put into context how fringe this is, the Anarchist Library, which has over 7500 pieces of anarchist writings, returns exactly 9 results for a search for anarcho-monarchism. Of these, several include the term only in the titles of references, which themselves appear to be among the other 9 entries, and more than one propose it as a more accurate term for "anarcho-capitalism." One of them calls it an aesthetic form of government based on Tolkien. The most serious proposal seems to be for what is essentially just anarchism with a symbolic, but powerless monarch, which to me seems like an awfully minor distinction to warrant its own article. In contrast, we do not have a separate article on anarcho-syndicalism, for instance, which returns more than 50 results and has been addressed by Noam Chomsky. To me, its seems silly to have an article on each branch of anarchism at least as prominent as anarcho-monarchism, and it seems silly to have one on this branch but not on more prominent branches. I think a section in the anarchism article or the anarcho-capitalism article would be more than sufficient to cover this topic, if we are going to keep content on it. I also think it would be difficult to make the article more critical, because there just seems to be very little substance to criticize in the first place. Serene (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Here we go with the presuppositions, loaded questions, and half baked examples... Sigh... I'm not really interested in debating this, though I'd suggest you actually bother to read Marx. I'd also suggest you bother learning formal critical thinking skills, as you appear mistaken me for a Marxist (I'm not, I'm openly critical of Marx). ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- How is it feudalism if there is no monopoly on violence? If the monarch cannot create law? You are confusing absolutist monarchy with anarcho-monarchism. The Vatican is an example of anarcho-monarchism. A Marxist dictator is an example of absolutist monarchism (dictatorship). Which has been a larger historical disaster/failure? "pseudoscience and crankery" Simply labeling it as such does not make it true.206.189.11.198 (talk) 23:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- This isn't Wikipedia kiddo. RationalWiki is a fact checking/debunking site, not an encyclopedia. As for Anarcho-monarchism... It's feudalism, it's just feudalism. You know, that thing human society rejected in 1700s? It's feudalism and it's built on pseudoscience and crankery. Tough shit if you don't like that. As for my personal interests in this matter, I don't have any. You're a crank, we debunk cranks. It's as simple as that. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- More critical? Isn't the point of encyclopedias to be as non-critical as possible? What wrongs has this ideology committed, when compared to Marxism or the imperialist USA? "emphasize that this is an extremely fringe ideology." Popularity of an idea doesn't prove or disprove its merits. Einstein's ideas weren't immediately popular, so should we assume they're wrong? "Also revert the whitewashing moron on sight." Something tells me your intentions are not intellectual honesty or freedom of thought/association, but instead to insert your bias into every definition on this site. You need to reflect upon your actions here. 206.189.11.198 (talk) 23:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- This article has more content in comparison to the other "anarcho" article that was deleted. By the way, Christopher, having an article on anarchism itself, then 3 additional anarchist ideologies (With Anarcho-Capitalism which isn't an anarchist ideology, it is libertarian instead), including this one is not "every anarcho- ideology" as you put it. Moreover, the article can always be improved, it is a stub after all. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 22:47, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- 188.63.179.180 (talk) 23:09, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Merge/redirect[edit]
- I think we should replace with a section in Anarchism#Not_anarchism and have the page redirect there. (I'm actually surprised it's not mentioned in the article) ℕoir LeSable (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with Noir above. Uncle Mark (talk) 18:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)