Democracy has given us the highest quality of life...ever.
Not sure why you want us to convert to Anarchism, that is far too much freedom. We need order in our lives. We need to find the right balance between freedom and order.
And democracy is the closest we have come yet to finding that perfect balance.
Gender: Male Location: Drifting off around the bend
It is a great idea. I don't argue with that. The problem is you could never get everyone to agree with it. If another government existed and decided to invade an anarchism based society would fall. There is no method to maintain a force as large as any other government based society would be capable of. The anarchism based societies of the past all have fallen to governed nations. Celtic Ireland was also anrchism based for a period, there have been around ten documented anarcho-capitalist societies.
but not everyone agrees with a communist government, or capitalist, everyone has their differences. Lets say there was anarchy in the USA, there are in fact quite a few anarchists in USA, and everyone (well, 80% ) turned anarchist, as they saw the optimistic points, the other 20% would just be killed if they tried to do anything.
Gender: Male Location: Drifting off around the bend
The issue is that anarchy doesn't lend itself to cohesive unity. Hypothetically 80% turned atheist. The atheists would disagree on the proper method of dealing with the 20% that weren't. If they grouped together in a cohesive way to stop the non-anarchists they would in effect be starting a government, which is the opposite of their intent. Governments don't require everyone agree. An anarchism based society relies on goodwill existing between its members and a desire for the society to work.
Gender: Unspecified Location: Lost in a Roman Wilderness of Pain
Hey rickyduck, Anarchism is a wonderful dream, I'd personally love it but not in a society like ours, it just wouldn't work.
People don't break the law because there are laws to break but because of their own greed, lust, wrath, etc.
And although many atrocities do still happen with a government, the government is still able to stop more than a few crimes.
Not because there is no government does it mean people suddenly will start to be merciful, selfless and compassionate.
__________________ "Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity." — Thor Heyerdahl
I never said selfless, but there would certainly be less crime, yea people do it out of their own greed, and revenge, but they also do it to defy a nation, protests is a prime example of that.
An authority figure, but he was just someone they worship, not follow rules.
Gender: Unspecified Location: Lost in a Roman Wilderness of Pain
You seriously believe there would be less crime if there were no government? Well, technically you're right since there would be no laws, so murder and thievery would not be a crime. But people would still do those things, and since there would be no consequences they'd do it a lot more.
And I doubt the percentage of protest crimes, like bombings of anarchist activist groups are any high than 5 percent of all crimes.
And, the shamans or tribe leaders did impose laws among the clans or tribes. I've never heard of any clan or tribe with no leader to impose laws.
__________________ "Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity." — Thor Heyerdahl
In the Caveman times they didnt have tribes, it was, practically, Anarchy, every man for himself. What i'm trying to get at is, there would be no need for crimes, people do crimes for a reason, and theivery wouldnt be theivery because all that the person they stole it of has to do is get another 1. For free! Bombings of Anarchist activist groups? Anarchists are nearlly pacifists! They dont support violence in anyway shape or form. There are a lot of protests, wether they are just mild (like people riding nude through london) or major, like animal rights activists.
Gender: Unspecified Location: Lost in a Roman Wilderness of Pain
First of all, if you label yourself as an Anarchist do some research first. Anarchist are not all pacifists, many believe in achieving an Anarchist world by violent means.
Now, the theory of anarchy suggests that people will be satisfied with what they need and what they need only, like Communism. But people are always going to want things they can't get.
__________________ "Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity." — Thor Heyerdahl
I never labelled myself as an anarchist! I'm socialist, I only said I was obsessed with anarchism after eading an article about it.
Everyone wants things they can't get anyway, in Capitilism, nationalism, Pacifism, Communism, Socialism, luxembourgism everything, but in unlike in a state of anarchism, we would want things that dont exist, in anarchy we would want things that do exist, and get them. the only reason people WANT things is for entertainment/to show off, or to cause disruption. I never said all anarchists are pacifists, hell no, as you said, many people believe getting anarchism by destructive means.
Gender: Unspecified Location: Lost in a Roman Wilderness of Pain
Ok, I'm confused, you're socialist now? There are some things that would suggest otherwise.
Either way, yes everyone wants things that they can't get regardless of the type of government, but people go through rather drastic means to get what they want and Democracy, Communism, Socialism all make sure there's a certain line people can't cross.
We are not animals, we have brains, there are bounds, no government would be a big mess and should not happen unless overnight we all become merciful, generous beings.
And for the last part "I never said all anarchists are pacifists, hell no, as you said, many people believe getting anarchism by destructive means."
I'm quite sure you did.
__________________ "Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity." — Thor Heyerdahl
I said I 'believed' in the theory of anarchism, never ment i am anarchist, i just thought it would be a good idea, not as good as socialism.
As for the second bit. im an idiot, because I was wrong, i was ment to say 'most anarchists are pacifists, and those ones dont support violence', especialy the eco-anarchists and green anarchists. Im very sorry for my mistake.
Whats wrong with animals? Just because our high industrial usage is killing them all of, doesnt mean we're better than them.
actually fishing.
Last edited by rickyduck on Jun 11th, 2006 at 10:57 AM
Somali, Anarcho-Capitalist, and I know im anti-capitalist, but it only uses capitalism as a baseline. Anarchism in Somali is doing it very well, and I'd much prefer to live there than here.