Poll: Anarchism

[LewsTherin]

Anarchism in the form of mutual co-operation is perhaps the most desired form of government.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Anarchism replaces "Rule By Law" by "Rule By Force", and then adds in starvation, slavery and subjugation.

Even if it could work, you're looking at 90% of the human race getting torn apart in the change of state. Zombie Apocalypses are a more stable form of government.

 

[Joool]

I dont think it could work because as several people have said humans would need to ban together and im 99% sure that will never happen. To many people have been fighting bitter wars since the dawn of time for this to work instead when society collapsed it would either rebuild it self or the remaining people would kill each other off.

Humans don't need to band together, all humans have to do is recognise that coercive monopolys are bad, just like we recogniced that slavery is bad.

 

[Joool]

Anarchism replaces "Rule By Law" by "Rule By Force", and then adds in starvation, slavery and subjugation.

What we currently have isn't rule by force?

 

[Di22y]

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

Yeh maybe there would be mass looting at first, until the people had enough and then things would settle down. There is no reason why there wouldn't be apolice force, they would just have no laws to go by. Maybe now you see the light. Yeh.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Anarchism replaces "Rule By Law" by "Rule By Force", and then adds in starvation, slavery and subjugation.

What we currently have isn't rule by force?

If you honestly think we live under rule by force, who provides the health care, roads, police work, food processing, computer repairs, booksales, psychiatric help and everything else that a modern society wants?

"Rule by force" means that you do something now or *BANG*. No criminal justice system.

 

[Joool]

If you honestly think we live under rule by force, who provides the health care, roads, police work, food processing, computer repairs, booksales, psychiatric help and everything else that a modern society wants?

"Rule by force" means that you do something now or *BANG*. No criminal justice system.

In fact I do think that. If I don't pay taxes to fund all those "great" services the government will go *BANG*.

Furthermore most of the services you mentioned aren't state funded but private.

 

[TerribleTerryTate]

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

This. It's in our nature to crave more. There is no possible way anarchy would last more than a few minutes.

 

[SWCEMarlboros]

anarchy will never exist cuz just the belief of anarchy goes agianst of what it stands for. bring it on "anarchiest"

 

[SilentHunter7]

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.

No Market Anarchism is the idea that all agencies and organizations are privately owned and operated, so I would pay a security company to shoot you if you attempted to steal my stuff. Have a look at it here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-market_anarchism

what about poor people?

Poor people adapt or starve to death, soon enough there will be no more poor people and the world will prosper, well until someone gets their hands on some nukes at least.

Or until some incredibly rich guy buys all of the security companies and declares himself dictator.

 

[MorteSphere]

Why, aren't you a moronic little troll. ^^

 

[Klarinette]

Anarchy doesn't work. Even if it does for a short time, don't people usually choose a leader (or some jackass appoints themself the leader), making the situation more of a dictatorship than anarchy, anyway?

Doesn't seem like anything that has any real chance of sticking.

 

[Destal]

The "People are shit" argument is probably the worst argument against anarchy ever.

If people are shit, how is giving the state a monopoly on force which attracts those people gonna solve anything.

Oh and here's the proof of anarchy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIs5r3ujBmw

The arguments that he makes are so incredibly easy to refute it's laughable. He can't make a single coercive argument for anarchism. If anything, he made me believe that it would work even less than I did previously.

90% of those people advocating anarchism wouldn't last 10 minutes in an anarchist society.

Read John Locke, Montesquieu, Machiavelli, Bodin. They can explain how having no gov't is a bad, bad idea.

A man after my own heart. Those are some great philosophers you mentioned there.

Indeed they are. I'm glad they were part of the Political Studies course in secondary school. While I disagree with most of what Machievelli writes, his idea of what a society with no government or leader would work like is pretty spot-on.

I agree with you on Machiavelli, I'm not sure about his ends justify the means argument. I am however, impressed that you got that much from a political studies class. I didn't get really into philosophy from school until college. I had an amazing teacher.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

I've said this before, but anarchy would work best when social and everyone works together. This is a given in communism, and is one of the reasons why I promote anarcho-communism. This way government will simply not be necessary, as the people will govern themselves. You think there's going to be crime? I don't. The people will simply band together to stop it. And society will be classless. No rich, no poor. Everyone will be equal and treated as equals because everyone will need each other. This means peace, prosperity, equality and freedom, all in one sweet deal. We don't need to depend on a government.

It has been said that anarchy works best in small towns. Well? Why don't we just do that then, split it all into townships? Wouldn't that work?