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.
Originally posted by rickyduck
...the idea of Anarchism is great. everyone would still carry on making things and developing and letting rooms and hotels, I mean sure, they wont get payed, but whats to loose from it? Charities will still be run for the ill, not poor as there would be no poor, life without a government would mean we are not controlled, we are free.
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.
Originally posted by Regret
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.
Originally posted by rickyduck
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.
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.
Originally posted by Regret
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.
But what about for the millions of years we lived in Anarchy? We survived through the ice age!
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.
Originally posted by Eis
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.
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.
Originally posted by Eis
All tribes had leaders, or shamans, or some form of authority figure. 😖
Originally posted by rickyduck
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.
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.
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.
Originally posted by rickyduck
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.
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.
Originally posted by Eis
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.
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.
Originally posted by rickyduck
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.
...And I reckon the world should turn anarchist, as I think its a great idea - no government would mean no wars which would mean peace, and everything would turn out fine.
I just believe in the philosiphical theory of anarchism
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.
Anarchists are nearlly pacifists! They dont support violence in anyway shape or form.
Originally posted by Eis
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.
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.
Originally posted by ThePrincessBee
Mankinds first hope was fire-worshiping.baby
actually fishing.
Originally posted by rickyduck
Yes, over capitalist. there is no socialist countries (that I know of), yet there is an anarchist country, and look how well its doing.
And what country is anarchist? I'm quite surprised I haven't heard of it.
Originally posted by Eis
So ok, you're not an anarchist, you're a socialist but you don't think the whole world should be socialist but you think the whleAnd what country is anarchist? I'm quite surprised I haven't heard of it.
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.