Do you believe anarchism can work?

Many believe that anarchism is a self-contradicting political ideation. However, I tend to disagree. One would argue that anarchism requires and is by nature organizational and thus conflicts against its own principles. Yet, the idea is simple; the creation of one unified organization, an evil for an evil, is needed to bring an end to all other organizations, and upon success it would lead to the dissipation of the lasting establishment of the anarchist league, thus having only free man.

anarchy?

why anarchy? first off, what are you trying to escape? (if nothing, you're quite....odd)
Second: without some sense of order, humanity would go nowhere. we'd be just as good as animals. think of life going back to the stone age. without order, we steal, kill, etc. nothing gets repaired, no trial, no law, nothing. we wouldn't be able to build large buildings b/c it requires a level of order.

anarchy cannot work.
40% Voted for by Crusader318, Weydon.
View 19 comments Hide Comments
Please login or register to comment.
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
- right now
  
  Adding your comment:
- TeChNoWC
  March 25, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  But that's because you want organization. Animals 'work', so living like an animal, would. It may not be desirable, but it would still work.
- petethemeat
  March 25, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  If a free-market is truly self-regulating then Anarchy would work, as Humans would have essentially a good nature. It just depends how optimistic you are about human nature.
- M.Ridgway
  March 25, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  hey Crusader,while you're living in the past,think about this,how does law exist today?BECAUSE THEY LEARNED TO WORK TOGETHER,without some upper authority forcing it down their throats with this or that law.
- Weydon
  March 25, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  I am both optimistic and realistic. Crusade's right. If anarchy was instated tomorrow, the world would fall into shambles--plenty of good people, with plenty of bad people to muck it all up.
  
  You know what would make things gradually reach order? People that trust each other banding together, forming communities, creating rules against stealing from each other and violence, and punishing the people that break these rules which threatens both the new community and natural human existence and fairness. Building roads and town walls and regulating trade--which everyone benefits from, so everyone would need to contribute somehow either through labor or taxes.
  
  Upper authority "forcing down their throats" is an exaggeration. It's the same thing as small communities, just on a larger scale. I like my computer, I like my AC, I like my highways and airplanes and ability to easily trade and communicate and travel through neighboring areas. I like feeling safe when I leave my localized community, knowing the same laws exist in the next town over.
  
  The law regulates us, and we regulate the law. Quid pro pro.
  
  Not to sound demeaning, but I have never personally encountered an anarchist that wasn't a complete hypocrite going through an adolescent or post-adolescent "look how unique I am" angry phase. We have real problems that need to be dealt with, I don't need anarchists using computers and education provided solely by social order telling me why we need abolish government.
- M.Ridgway
  March 25, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  Bit of advice,if you dont want to hear from anarchists,dont look at a post with "anarchism" in the title.
- Weydon
  March 25, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  I do not want to hear from anarchists.
- Crusader318
  March 27, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  congratulations
  "because they learned to work together"
  well, as great as that sounds, two things:
  first, that's not at all a current thing... animals work together at times, so why attempt to insult me for some retarded reason?
  
  second: without a central governing force, many things cannot happen as quickly as if we required consensus. (consensus... referring to democracy.... developed in ANCIENT GREECE... and how can i live in the past when I'm only 16???)
  
  For example, a couple thousand guys didn't just one day say "let's build the pyramids!" one guy ordered it. the rest followed his lead. The world needs leadership.
- M.Ridgway
  March 28, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  My intention isnt to insult,just to get people to look at both sides of the equation.When I said living in the past I wasnt being literal,I meant in your ideas.As for the pyramids,why did they have a pharoah? It was a LIVING GOD.Religion and politics are two different subjects.
- Weydon
  March 28, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  Not in a theocracy they're not.
- Applehead
  March 29, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  There are different Anarchistic groups/ideas Anarchistic Communism being just one.
- Applehead
  March 29, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  Thanks but i decided to leave it
- LostPriest
  March 30, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  Anarchy has a requirement that they are more good people who beleive in it, than others who would try to take advantage of it. Then when those people or individual attempted to inflict harm on another the "good people" would simply join together for that moment and help each other out. A large number of early settlements in America proceded in this fashion, farming communities in the 15 and 16 hundreds lived by those rules. (Freedom By Eric Foner)
  
  If attempted people would have to develop complex rules of dealing with others that would be accepted the world over. Probably containing duels marriages, children, and education. Each having a simple solution that would sustain the individual as his own leader
  
  People do not need leadership, the pyramids where built to do what exactly? Bury the dead and hide their treasure. If you take away the value of money they are simply vast wastes of time and labor to cover a corpse. The pyramids are illogical.
  
  I have no proof about this next statement just a thought. Kings and the like were elected early on to end squabbles amongst people that they were to lazy to take care of themselves. For doing that they granted him the ability to control their lives. What is logical about giving one human power over another in a circumstance. Direct democracy is similar, what about the minority in Athens do you think they agreed that they were free all the time. U.S. can monitor you communication with others, restrict what you eat, restrict what you drink, ban books, tax, draft, tell you what you can't do, take your property for a minimum amount of money, and force all changes on you with the use of the National Guard. Where is the freedom to live in this.
  
  If the world went to anarchy everyone would have be convinced it was for the best and respect the independence that would come with it. For if one person were to attempt violence and many others followed him the world would take the same course to this destination again.
- Applehead
  March 30, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  I so wish we could applaud comments!!!
- M.Ridgway
  March 30, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  ditto to apple,well done
- Applehead
  September 1, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  lmao you have a way with words that hits straight to the point he he.
  
  Also I wonder, what is it that makes people beahave badly? Steal, harm, kill even. As you say these things are real and so in a society such as ours we need to protect ourselves which creates conflict. So how can we find a common similarity that might help us to overcome peoles need to be "bad" or as i believe their temptation to sin. People bottle up anger. All kinds of psychological reactions stem from anger being internally or outwardly directed. If people could deal with anger maybe they could learn to forgive and love instead of feeling the need to avenge or just destroy as they feel they have been destroyed.
- Applehead
  September 1, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  lmao you have a way with words that hits straight to the point he he.
  
  Also I wonder, what is it that makes people beahave badly? Steal, harm, kill even. As you say these things are real and so in a society such as ours we need to protect ourselves which creates conflict. So how can we find a common similarity that might help us to overcome peoles need to be "bad" or as i believe their temptation to sin. People bottle up anger. All kinds of psychological reactions stem from anger being internally or outwardly directed. If people could deal with anger maybe they could learn to forgive and love instead of feeling the need to avenge or just destroy as they feel they have been destroyed.
Please register or login to comment! It's totally free
right now

Adding your reply:
Your Comment:

Anarchy = Violence

Or so a lot of people assume. Why do they think this because they are human and judge, unfortunately, by Human standards.

Anarchist communism has certain elements which appeal to me in some ways. Although it could be grossly problematic I would like to trust that one day we may reach a state of awareness that would allow us to live just and communal lives without the need for money. Belief in each other trust and vision would be needed and unfortunately while people engross themselves in soap operas and the like we are not likely to get anywhere very fast.

40% Voted for by Applehead, AlaskaMoleman.

View 5 comments

Hmmmm

Well, I took one of those tests online that show what your political affiliation is and...guess what? It said that I was an anarchist.

(this shows what garbage they are)
Total anarchy is destructive. You cannot discuss about anarchy when you have people killing their spouses; when you have people suing the parents of a 5 year-old girl because she kissed a boy at school.
In order to live in an anarchist society, the individuals part of the society should have a conscience and act responsibly. There is no such thing, is there?

Voted for by Stella Cadente.

View 12 comments

right now

Adding your comment:
Weydon
March 27, 2007
Edit | Reply

Hm...I think some of those tests are more accurate than others (like ones on sites built around them as opposed to ones anyone can make on the spot), but I also think 99% of them are about as "accurate" (vaguely attributing/complimenting) as horoscopes.

I do agree that anarchy is faulty, but I wouldn't worry about what the test says about you. It is likely the creator is under some silly assumption that anarchy is ONLY about personal freedom and optimistic views on humanity as a whole.
- Stella Cadente
  March 28, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  Plus, the choices people make sometimes when they take those tests depend on the mood they are. Therefore..like Albert Einstein said "relativity" my friend....everything is relative.
M.Ridgway
March 28, 2007
Edit | Reply

While I still stand for anarchy(and seem to be the only one)You're arguement makes sense stella.
- Stella Cadente
  March 28, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  Believe me, I understand you very well. Anarchy is very appealing to me as well,like John Adams said "“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” However,democracy would be better than anarchy because we need a centered government for domestic protection and stability at home. But it has to be a government whose powers derive from the consent of the governed. I think, since there are different types of people today, we need protection because today, we don't even know our neighbors.
  It is a complicated world system we've created, huh? And what "sucks" is that we did not get a say in this....
TeChNoWC
March 29, 2007
Edit | Reply

Yes you do, just not in necessarily how other people's lives should be ruled. You have choice enough for your own two bit piece. What more do you want?
M.Ridgway
March 29, 2007
Edit | Reply

people to wake up to reality,Tech. I'm glad that Stella understands what I'm fighting for here.Just like that quote used, the people dont give a damn about what the minority seems to think.
Weydon
March 29, 2007
Edit | Reply

Get over yourself. I value personal freedom more than most, I just understand society can't function without order. Order can't exist by people going "Whoa whoa whoa whoa...why don't we just all get along?!" and then clap hands and sing a worldwide rendition of Why Can't We Be Friends.

People are bad. People will rob, cheat, steal, kill, fight. Who's going to make sure deals are upheld? Violent offenders apprehended? Do an adequate trial and investigation to make sure the RIGHT person is apprehended? Rabbles of good people with torches and pitchforks? Because we all know about the very successful "Good-Mafia" out there. Who's going to maintain the roads? Supply our power?

Anarchy should be synonymous with impossible but wonderful utopian society, much like the Smurfs (though this is technically a Communist-Anarchy which is a specification of what most REAL anarchists means, and which Apple was right about. You're pretty snide about anarchism for quickly dismissing communism of having anything in common with its pure meaning) Instead, anarchy has been forced with a simple "everyone is free and that's it, no other rules or regulations" definition. (Which is a paradox really , because you would work together with the people you trust and have unofficial rules and regulations and manners that you live by.) Therefore it is synonymous with chaos and disorder, or people that like to proclaim anarchy is good--and reply to intelligent arguments by saying "Oh boy! What a pile of ignorant lumps! No one respects minority rights..."
- Stella Cadente
  March 29, 2007
  Edit | Reply
  
  If you'll read my comments, you'll understand that I agree with you. Yes, people are bad, people will rob, cheat, steal, kill fight. I am a hobbsian as well...and there's a reason why I used John Adams's quote; because he was a hobbsian too. I quote, from my comment: "However,democracy would be better than anarchy because we need a centered government for domestic protection and stability at home. But it has to be a government whose powers derive from the consent of the governed. I think, since there are different types of people today, we need protection because today, we don't even know our neighbors."
Weydon
March 29, 2007
Edit | Reply

Wasn't talking to you
M.Ridgway
March 30, 2007
Edit | Reply

It's pretty obvious who that was intended to Stella.
Applehead
September 1, 2007
Edit | Reply

lmao you have a way with words that hits straight to the point he he.

Also I wonder, what is it that makes people beahave badly? Steal, harm, kill even. As you say these things are real and so in a society such as ours we need to protect ourselves which creates conflict. So how can we find a common similarity that might help us to overcome peoles need to be "bad" or as i believe their temptation to sin. People bottle up anger. All kinds of psychological reactions stem from anger being internally or outwardly directed. If people could deal with anger maybe they could learn to forgive and love instead of feeling the need to avenge or just destroy as they feel they have been destroyed.