Anarchy? Really?

[Blindswordmaster]

Rejoice, for I have finally returned from my vacation. Now on to the subject at hand. Anarchy. I just don't get it. Humans are naturally ordered beings, why would any of them promote chaos? Humans have always created order and laws and governments to enforce this; so why would anyone support absolute chaos? I can easily understand the rejection of specific governments, but the rejection of all governments in any form is illogical. I just don't understand it. Thoughts?

 

[Loop Stricken]

If you haven't noticed, Governments tend towards totalitarianism.

 

[delet]

No, humans are chaos and they bring chaos to the world. They attempt to create order from it and commonly fail.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

I don't know where you got the idea that humans are orderly...

Who knows why people choose Anarchy. Maybe they want to be different. Maybe they think it would actually work. Or maybe they just don't give a fuck and want to set the world on fire.

 

[AceAngel]

My room and bathroom are chaos if I don't keep them clean...

 

[DividedUnity]

Progress is made through change. Change is made by conflict. Anarchy helps create conflict

 

[Blindswordmaster]

If you haven't noticed, Governments tend towards totalitarianism.

Really? You're saying that there's no middle ground? It's only a choice between a fascist police state and complete anarchy? Now children, you and I know that's total bullshit.

 

[Always_Remain]

Must! Resist! Joker Reference!

 

[DMonkey]

Personally I think it is somewhere down the middle.
Chaotic, and orderly. The whole yin yang bullshit.

 

[Insanum]

We are creatures of habit[/I], not order.

We also act irrationally under pressure, or when startled.

 

[Mark Crimson]

I look at it this way: A game is only as fun as it's rules. There's always ways to provide a great deal of freedom while still staying within the rules. Even big games like GTA, dispite how big it is, there are edges to the border. There's punishments for doing something wrong and rewards for doing right. (GTA obviously has a diffrent view on what is right and wrong, by it's the spirit of the thing.) A game can let choose from a wide veriaty of levels, weapons, outfits, etc but still be limited by something. The more choice you get, the better. But people are naturally dickheads. If there isn't somebody at least keeping an eye on things, it degenerates.

 

[MisterStaypuft]

Anarchy isn't "imagine no possessions/I wonder if you can" like the anarchists apparently think it will be. It's barbarism. It's europe post-Rome. It's if my land can feed more thugs than your land, I am your king and we reset the government merry-go-round to feudalism

 

[Lucifer dern]

im an ex punk rocker (yeh i miss my moheaken 2) but i thinck it comes from the longing for freedom, for example when i became a punk it wasnt really becouse of the war in iraq yada yada that came after at first what sparked my intrest was the look of freedom it had (along with the awsome music) things like school who had a go at you if you where wearing the wrong colour socks and lying down on the field in the summer... and the police near me assume every one carrying a guitar is on crack... having no order seemed to atleast be a change from so many rules that dont even make sense or help...

 

[Wayneguard]

If you haven't noticed, Governments tend towards totalitarianism.

^^This.

If you haven't noticed, Governments tend towards totalitarianism.

Really? You're saying that there's no middle ground? It's only a choice between a fascist police state and complete anarchy? Now children, you and I know that's total bullshit.

If you had cared to read the post, that is not what was suggested. What this poster said was that governments tend toward totalitarianism. You've probably heard the analogy of boiling a lobster by slowly increasing the temperature. That is the process governments use to strip citizens of their rights and to control their behavior. That those in power tend to exercise it to secure their powerful status is not a radical thought nor a new one.

 

[subfield]

You've made two assumptions that aren't even true to first order: 1) Humans are naturally ordered beings 2) Humans have always created order and laws and governments.

The strictest definition of anarchy is that of small government. In my mind, it is closest to true democracy. The so-called democracy in the U.S.A., for instance, is more accurately termed: Republic.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

If you haven't noticed, Governments tend towards totalitarianism.

Really? You're saying that there's no middle ground? It's only a choice between a fascist police state and complete anarchy? Now children, you and I know that's total bullshit.

Yeah, until you remember he hails from the UK. Or at least is marked so in his profile.

 

[Fappy]

Must! Resist! Joker Reference!

Your avatar is a nice companion to your post

 

[Wedlock49]

anarchy would never and will never work. Like communism.

it relies on people abiding by levels of common courtesy so that you can live your life unhindered... that isn't going to happen, the stronger will bully the weaker so the stronger can live better. Then the stronger forces the weaker to do all the work... a voila you're in a totalitarian regime with the strongest at the head of "government"

Human nature always wins out.

 

[Blueruler182]

My question is this: Why is it always the people who would be dead inside a week that want anarchy? Seriously, it's never the big buff guy, it's always the guy who looks like he hasn't eaten, and probably hasn't out of fear of tracking devices and mind-altering chemicals in his imagined food.