Anarchy does it work?

[U.S. Patriot]

Who hear, thinks that anarchy does not lead to chaos? Or, that as a society we can survive without Government. Meaning, that without Government you would have chaos. I ask, because of a argument I have been engaged in with a couple of Liberals. Ones uneducated response was **** the system. The other gave me a link to an anarchist website. Which goes on to say. That a free society is one without Government. That as human beings we can live and get along without Government. I just want to slap the **** out of the both of them.

Liberals!

 

[rmabrey]

We cant get along without government but we cant get along with government. damned if you do damned if you dont kind of thing

 

[Joe Williams]

Not enough government is chaos. Too much government is tyranny.

If people are going to live together in a civilization, we need government. The trick is, to make sure we only have enough government.

 

[Muddy_Ford]

No.
Anarchy will only get you warlords instead of what we have now, don't ya think that would be worse? I do.

 

[rjstew317]

Not enough government is chaos. Too much government is tyranny. .

couldn't have said it better!
"you would be amazed at how much government you wouldn't miss" Mitch D

 

[j706]

Who hear, thinks that anarchy does not lead to chaos? Or, that as a society we can survive without Government. Meaning, that without Government you would have chaos. I ask, because of a argument I have been engaged in with a couple of Liberals. Ones uneducated response was **** the system. The other gave me a link to an anarchist website. Which goes on to say. That a free society is one without Government. That as human beings we can live and get along without Government. I just want to slap the **** out of the both of them.

Liberals!

And they probably said it with a straight face. I have often wondered what happens in a persons life that gets them thinking some of the asinine things they believe in. It kinda irritates me.

 

[Joe Williams]

And they probably said it with a straight face. I have often wondered what happens in a persons life that gets them thinking some of the asinine things they believe in. It kinda irritates me.

Didn't you tie one of them to your car this morning?

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

I actually think the answer is both YES and NO.

A tribe of people may survive without "Government".

However, historically once Civilizaton has been created man has always sought some sort of Governance.


Can America survive Anarchism? Heck no. We can barely survive it as is with the very simple instructions we allot society. Does anyone really want to think about what Society would be like without a Governing body that not only requires rules, but grants freedom.


In a completely anarchy society, it is my observation that there is a no holds bar on what is acceptable; And therefore I am free, so long as I am stronger to subject you to my will - As this is what will assuredly occur in such society.

 

[The Meach]

i suggest you read Freehold by Michael Z. Williamson.

Anarchy isn't a complete absence of a governing authority. It is the absence of Legislation and executive regulation. Power is wielded by communities not by the state. Crime is still punished, Crime just requires a victim for it to be a crime. Military takes the form of local militia. Communities band together for common defense against a larger foe.

"Anarchy" is the freest form of civilization, however it it places responsibility for your life on you. No catch-nets, or social securities.

 

[Joe Williams]

i suggest you read Freehold by Michael Z. Williamson.

Anarchy isn't a complete absence of a governing authority. It is the absence of Legislation and executive regulation. Power is wielded by communities not by the state. Crime is still punished, Crime just requires a victim for it to be a crime. Military takes the form of local militia. Communities band together for common defense against a larger foe.

"Anarchy" is the freest form of civilization, however it it places responsibility for your life on you. No catch-nets, or social securities.

Oh. It's tribalism... It's still practiced deep in the Amazon, some places in Africa, and among some Bedouins. Not a bad life, necessarily, so long as you don't want to live in the modern world.

 

[dhnorris]

I just want to slap the **** out of the both of them.

Liberals!

Under anarchy you could. You could also drive them before you and hear the wails and lamentations of their women. Anarchy only works if people are NICE.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Oh. It's tribalism... It's still practiced deep in the Amazon, some places in Africa, and among some Bedouins. Not a bad life, necessarily, so long as you don't want to live in the modern world.

Also widely practiced in the hills and hollows of Afganistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and other little garden spots and tourist attractions all over the world. Problem with those pesky little tribes; then tend to prefer inbreeding to expanding the gene pool. They don't so much like any not their kind comin up into those parts. Kinda like River Haven.

 

[SubicWarrior1988]

There are some examples to reflect upon within the world. The first that comes to mind is 1980's era Liberia and their civil war(s). Anarchy led to acquisition of power by force, imo. I don't believe that civilization as we know it would just fall into a symbiotic state of cooperation and helpfulness. Again my opinion here, but I believe that a lawless society would place man one tiny step above the animal world. Survival of the fittest. I don't have a lot of research to back this up, but there are examples throughout the world that have shown this behaviour. To be fair, anarchy as a result of the failure of an established governing system is the basis of what I'm talking about.

When we discuss tribal morals and values, there is typically still a heirarchy of power and a "pecking order" with rules and such. Retribution for breaking the societal norms in this group of folks is generally carried about by the village as a whole.

Good topic.

 

[Fletch]

We cannot do without government. We absolutely can get by without a State.

 

[Lobo]

Who hear, thinks that anarchy does not lead to chaos? Or, that as a society we can survive without Government. Meaning, that without Government you would have chaos. I ask, because of a argument I have been engaged in with a couple of Liberals. Ones uneducated response was **** the system. The other gave me a link to an anarchist website. Which goes on to say. That a free society is one without Government. That as human beings we can live and get along without Government. I just want to slap the **** out of the both of them.

Liberals!

Liberals? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that someone who prefers a society without government can be called a liberal. As a general rule, doesn't modern "liberalism" prefer big government, so long as it is left of center in ideology? I mean....they can't make you turn in your guns and drive a Prius without a big government.

 

[j706]

Didn't you tie one of them to your car this morning?

Yes sir as a matter of fact I did. He had a rough day. Looked just like some of these dems are gonna look in November ,dog bit and road rash

 

[CombatVet]

Oh. It's tribalism... It's still practiced deep in the Amazon, some places in Africa, and among some Bedouins. Not a bad life, necessarily, so long as you don't want to live in the modern world.

I would forgo the modern world for that sort of freedom, not sure I could get my wife and kids to go along with it though. My dream is to live in a remote part of Alaska alone with my wife (after kids are grown) and live a life off the grid in my own private bunker far away from every one and everything. No phones ect. Just me and my wife, no one to tell us what we can or can't do. I guess in that sort of sense of Anarchy I'm all for it.

 

[buckstopshere]

We cannot do without government. We absolutely can get by without a State.

Interesting perspective on this. I would feel the exact opposite. I would much rather have a cooperative of states that would defend the nation but the states would have their respective laws of the land.

If you don't like the laws in say California, move to Indiana to set up shop.

Just an off the cuff thought and an initial reaction. Not to say a reasonable argument couldn't sway me away from this line of thought.

 

[Fletch]

Interesting perspective on this. I would feel the exact opposite. I would much rather have a cooperative of states that would defend the nation but the states would have their respective laws of the land.

I'm using a different definition of the word "State".

 

[U.S. Patriot]

Liberals? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that someone who prefers a society without government can be called a liberal. As a general rule, doesn't modern "liberalism" prefer big government, so long as it is left of center in ideology? I mean....they can't make you turn in your guns and drive a Prius without a big government.

I know what you are saying. I just call all morons Liberals .