Poll: Anarchism

[stefanbertramlee]

Ive seen that a lot of people on the escapist are anarchists and not to offend but it wouldnt work, at all. In a state where there isnt a police force i see there being mass looting, riots and mass wrong headed Vigilante movements.In a state where there is no social programs i see the poor dieing or going round engaging in the looting and roiting.Also if in a anarchist state was formed i dont see it lasting long before the nation desended into a 1000 differnt wars as petty warlords fought for petty amounts of land.

bugger bad poll fixing it

 

[WrongSprite]

What the hell is with that poll.....theres bo positive options, and 3 will never work options. Anyways, thats good, because anarchism will never, ever work. I don't think thats the idea anyway.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Anarchy will last for the 10 minutes it takes for someone to establish some sort of Neo-Feudalism.

 

[SnowCold]

I think Anarchism is a flaw idea at it's base, cause if there is no govrment, anyone can take over, creating a govrment, and cancalling the anarchy.

 

[Cortheya]

Humans always desire power. It's a fact of life. Within minutes, someone would rise up and attempt to grab power for them self.

 

[The Maddest March Hare]

This is the same as why Communism will never work off paper either. In theory, a place with no police force where everyone does as they please sounds great, as does a place where everyone is an equal and has their equal share in everything. The problem lies in the fact that humanity as a whole is an inherently horrible species. We destroy what we can't have, murder and violate our own kind and always want to be on the top of the pile, even if it has to be a pile of headless bodies. Someone will always group together with some others to be a little more 'equal' than everyone else and then other people will follow suit, leading to gang wars. Eventually one will be the most powerful and they will take over as a governing body and we're back where we started.

 

[AmrasCalmacil]

Humans always desire power. It's a fact of life. Within minutes, someone would rise up and attempt to grab power for them self.

That's slightly creepy, given your avatar.

But yes, should society collapse than the biggest bastard with the most followers will probably rebuild it with a whole lot more whipping.

 

[Lord George]

Market Anarchism would solve all of those problems, its based around people being selfish in the first place, and no-ones better at being selfish then human beings.

 

[DannyBoy451]

Anarchism:

Great idea, but will never work.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

If all nations disolved tomorrow, the world would be a chaotic mess. A few strong individuals would rise above the masses and recruit like minded individuals.

The selfish ones will be Bandits, Raiders and Dictators, taking slaves and stealing what they want.

The more benevolant ones would form a sort of Neo-Fuedal organization, protecting people in exchange for goods, then labor, and soon, we have a medieval style social structure again.

 

[Jharry5]

Anarchism would never work, for the simple fact that human nature would get in the way. An anarachist state would descend very quickly into a Darwinist state.

 

[ckam]

Let me tell you something about history. There was once an Anarchist state called the Irish Tuatha. Well as you can see, the Irish Tuatha lived in Anarchy. What you wouldn't expect is that that state had no real wars; only minor brawls at most. Everybody was basically living good lives, and guess what: They existed for 1000 years. What ended it? The British Empire basically took over the world that's how. So basically, if Great Britain never invaded Ireland, we would have a perfectly level-headed Anarchist state.

P.S. Here's a fun read for you all too: http://www.anti-state.com/redford/redford4.html

 

[FalloutJack]

Proper anarchy requires a V For Vendetta approach to tearing down those in power. (If you don't know what I mean, read the comic. It's used as actual educational material in some college classes.) This is the omelet that requires some eggs, and chances are...it won't be pretty. And even then, there is no entire guarentee. But if it is to ever occur, there is one thing that anarchists are right about. All forms of authority must fall, and it will hurt when they do, badly.

But let us be honest, anarchists do not wish for chaos. There is a difference. Fact is, you can probably make your point without actually killing people, even, and people would look up to you more if you did. What do I want? Hell, I don't have a clue. But I would have certain qualities that enable me to at least put this sort of thing into motion. If I find the nature of government wrong, I would have the desire for it to change, and if I somehow found myself tearing down authority, I wouldn't want to replace it with myself. I would make a terrible leader. I'm most definitely evil.

 

[stefanbertramlee]

Proper anarchy requires a V For Vendetta approach to tearing down those in power. (If you don't know what I mean, read the comic. It's used as actual educational material in some college classes.) This is the omelet that requires some eggs, and chances are...it won't be pretty. And even then, there is no entire guarentee. But if it is to ever occur, there is one thing that anarchists are right about. All forms of authority must fall, and it will hurt when they do, badly.

But let us be honest, anarchists do not wish for chaos. There is a difference. Fact is, you can probably make your point without actually killing people, even, and people would look up to you more if you did. What do I want? Hell, I don't have a clue. But I would have certain qualities that enable me to at least put this sort of thing into motion. If I find the nature of government wrong, I would have the desire for it to change, and if I somehow found myself tearing down authority, I wouldn't want to replace it with myself. I would make a terrible leader. I'm most definitely evil.

is the comic a lot differnt to the film?

 

[Archaeology Hat]

Add in another one:

Has worked but won't work again

In the Mesolithic we (probably) live in a state of "Primitive Communism", essentially ammouting to very small-scale Anarchist states. However the introduction of things like... an economy of any kind via having a sedentry population and farming and crippling overspecialisation will mean we probably won't ever achieve it again.

 

[DarkLordofDevon]

Systems can work if properly constructed. Unfortunately it is often the case that the heads of said systems are corrupt. Anarchy in itself does not produce a long term working system. You can't plan for the future for too much is undefined. You need a non-corruptable system which can calculate for future variables. Of course such a system cannot exist in the real world because it depends on people working for the greater good rather than personal advancement.
In short - anarchy doesn't work, but neither does anything else.

 

[stefanbertramlee]

Add in another one:

Has worked but won't work again

In the Mesolithic we (probably) live in a state of "Primitive Communism", essentially ammouting to very small-scale Anarchist states. However the introduction of things like... an economy of any kind via having a sedentry population and farming and crippling overspecialisation will mean we probably won't ever achieve it again.

done it

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Market Anarchism would solve all of those problems, its based around people being selfish in the first place, and no-ones better at being selfish then human beings.

No, it wouldn't, because I would kill you and take your nice things. Thus, people would soon learn that it was inadvisable to have nice things, lest someone take them. Thus, your theory fails just as hard as regular anarchism, because that's what it is. You just added 'Market' onto the front of it.

 

[Jedoro]

It might have worked before, but I doubt it could ever work again. No one would have a society where everyone was ok with anarchy. Someone would always be trying to become better than everyone else.