Anarchy.

AuthorMessage
schooldropout
Banned
schooldropout
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 88

Blog
July 24th, 2007 at 12:43pm
The goverment make policies that aren't needed. The power goes to their head and then they make up stupid rules like the smoking ban.

People make out that these people saved their lives, why are they letting child mollestors walk out in the street.
Meski
Addict
Meski
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 14856

Blog
July 24th, 2007 at 02:26pm
schooldropout:
The goverment make policies that aren't needed. The power goes to their head and then they make up stupid rules like the smoking ban.

People make out that these people saved their lives, why are they letting child mollestors walk out in the street.
Well, I do kind of support the smoking ban, kids that their parents smoke too much are smokers themselves, they smoke more, cause they inhale, tobacco without a filter so it's mostly that.

But anyway besides that they make very stupid rules.
Kristmas_Tsanne
Great Success!
Kristmas_Tsanne
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 59158

Blog
July 24th, 2007 at 03:21pm
Tears Don't Fall.:
I!atthedeathlyhallow:
There are different forms of anarchy. Yes?
But the one I found interesting was the one where they believe that you don't need specific rules, but you simply follow what you find to be the best/decide to do.

Some people think anarchy is breaking the rules because they can. But maybe it wouldn't be breaking the rules. I guess it all depends on how you were raised, what your morals are, what you find to be right and wrong.


see thats how i learned it to be... the whole breaking the rules thing (more or less)
But see, I find that stupid.
Even if you disagree with the rules that are set up, you shouldn't just break them because they're rules. You shouldn't break them at all.
And if noone broke them, we wouldn't need specific rules, in theory. Dno
Mike Dirnt.
King For A Couple Of Days
Mike Dirnt.
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Posts: 2712

Mibba
July 25th, 2007 at 02:41pm
I'm sort of half and half.
I support anarchy in a way because I believe that without the authorities, you can basically do the things you want to do. This doesn't mean that everybody would suddenly be going out on killing sprees.
Authorities do not supply us with morals.
Are you saying that if you had no authorities all your morals would go out the window?
I think it'd still be a civilised place but it'd be easier to have fun and not have to worry about laws so much.

Then again I think that we all need some rules to live by, just to keep people in order. There should be a few laws and punishments on big crimes or some people may go out of control.
The Doctor
Falling In Love With The Board
The Doctor
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 8786

Mibba Blog
July 25th, 2007 at 03:57pm
schooldropout:
The goverment make policies that aren't needed. The power goes to their head and then they make up stupid rules like the smoking ban.

People make out that these people saved their lives, why are they letting child molestors walk out in the street?


1. The smoking ban is not stupid. If you wish to make further comment, move your argument to the Smoking thread.
2. Apart from the smoking ban, what policies?
3. Child molestors are people too and if they serve their time then you can't ask any more from them. There are restrictions in place.
Ol' Blue Eyes.
King For A Couple Of Days
Ol' Blue Eyes.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 4816

Mibba
July 25th, 2007 at 07:43pm
I don't think anarchy will solve any problems at all. People are greedy by nature, and if we aren't watched and punished, then what's going to stop us from turning into complete deviants? I mean, think about, how many of us would drive carelessly, speed, and pile dozens of people into our car if there weren't police there to give us tickets and take away the car and our licenses? Can you imagine how many accidents there would be without those restrictions?
robotchicken.
Falling In Love With The Board
robotchicken.
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 8423

Mibba
July 29th, 2007 at 03:51am
Ol' Blue Eyes.:
I don't think anarchy will solve any problems at all. People are greedy by nature, and if we aren't watched and punished, then what's going to stop us from turning into complete deviants? I mean, think about, how many of us would drive carelessly, speed, and pile dozens of people into our car if there weren't police there to give us tickets and take away the car and our licenses? Can you imagine how many accidents there would be without those restrictions?
True, But other people argue that not everyone would go out and do just that, just cause there is no law, we throw away all our morals? Some would, and some wouldn't, See but the ones that would might cause big problems, and then how would we handle it? We'd still kill each other over it, wouldn't we? And since there is no law, we can also get away with it.
vivalarorya
Falling In Love With The Board
vivalarorya
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 8405
December 10th, 2007 at 10:53pm
...[bumps the thread] Coolio

I really like anarchy in concept. But in actual practice....ugh, I dunno. It all depends on the people, on their morals. Like in the post above me, not every single person in an anarchic nation would go out and kill everyone they meet. Would some people do that? Probably. But...I dunno. Maybe there should be a couple rules, like if you do something really huge and horrible...but I suppose that would lead to a kind of, "How far is too far?" argument.

BASICALLY, this is what I think.

Anarchy=bad, for the obvious reasons. Everyone's going to kill everyone of course. Rolling Eyes

Anarchy=good, because I don't believe in government as a concept...being told how to live and whatnot. Having to live by what other people [whom you may have no connection to whatsoever] believe to be right. Who says they're right all of the time?...We all know they aren't.

...And now I'm rambling. -_- But...okay. People are always going to be murdering, stealing, etc. A system of government isn't necessarily bringing down those rates, because no one really knows for sure what they'd be in an anarchaic state. Maybe they'd go up [and I'll admit, they probably would]. But they're never going to go away, no matter what anyone does.

...And now I'm REALLY rambling, so I'm going to shut up. >.>
JOOLS
Addict
JOOLS
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 11676

Mibba Blog
December 10th, 2007 at 11:27pm
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-
Kurtni
Admin
Kurtni
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 34289

Mibba Blog
December 11th, 2007 at 08:25pm
Santa:
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-

I've come to discover that most people who support anarchy won't answer your questions lmfao
worn-out astronaut.
Had A Life Before GSB
worn-out astronaut.
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 28177

Mibba Blog
December 11th, 2007 at 09:34pm
Santa:
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-
That kid is a moron and anarchy isn't chaos. Cassie
JOOLS
Addict
JOOLS
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 11676

Mibba Blog
December 12th, 2007 at 01:47am
east infection.:
Santa:
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-
That kid is a moron and anarchy isn't chaos. Cassie

tbh, that's just my thinking, but if it's not, could you give me an exact definition or something? I'm intrigued Coolio
JOOLS
Addict
JOOLS
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 11676

Mibba Blog
December 12th, 2007 at 01:47am
Kurtni:
Santa:
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-

I've come to discover that most people who support anarchy won't answer your questions lmfao

lmfao quite true.
Sherlock
Board Parasite
Sherlock
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35331
December 12th, 2007 at 01:23pm
How is anarchy not chaos? Coolio
Meski
Addict
Meski
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 14856

Blog
December 12th, 2007 at 06:18pm
Santa:
east infection.:
Santa:
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-
That kid is a moron and anarchy isn't chaos. Cassie

tbh, that's just my thinking, but if it's not, could you give me an exact definition or something? I'm intrigued Coolio
Anarchy is the absence of politics and politicians. Meaning that one person doesn't control millions of people, but people control themselves with freedom and freewill. The problem of anarchy is that a huge country like the US can't be controlled, it would be chaos and a system would be put up again. I think that anarchy should be made in small groups of people all over the given country to have more control and dodging a new system.
JOOLS
Addict
JOOLS
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 11676

Mibba Blog
December 12th, 2007 at 10:27pm
Meski:
Santa:
east infection.:
Santa:
Anarchy really frustrates me.
This kid in my Government class was trying to convince me of it working the other day.
His words: "We just need to go to complete anarchy. Then, in a few years, establish a better system of government."
My words: "Yah right. A) how many people do you know of would go back to a system of order after they've experienced total freedom? and B) what exactly is this better system of government?"
His argument was that "you need a total system of chaos before you can start a government"
Still hasn't answered my question -_-
That kid is a moron and anarchy isn't chaos. Cassie

tbh, that's just my thinking, but if it's not, could you give me an exact definition or something? I'm intrigued Coolio
Anarchy is the absence of politics and politicians. Meaning that one person doesn't control millions of people, but people control themselves with freedom and freewill. The problem of anarchy is that a huge country like the US can't be controlled, it would be chaos and a system would be put up again. I think that anarchy should be made in small groups of people all over the given country to have more control and dodging a new system.

So... I'm gonna stay with my thinking and that it's chaos Coolio
But really, the small group idea wouldn't work too well either because who's to stop that group from spreading to another and another, etc. They'd all just combind eventually. Unless someone stopped them... which would lose the general point...
Mass-suicide
Shoot Me, I'm A Newbie
Mass-suicide
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Posts: 51
December 13th, 2007 at 12:59am
Fuck, archary rebel politics everything is Conforminity
Ol' Blue Eyes.
King For A Couple Of Days
Ol' Blue Eyes.
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 4816

Mibba
December 13th, 2007 at 06:48am
Santa:
So... I'm gonna stay with my thinking and that it's chaos Coolio
But really, the small group idea wouldn't work too well either because who's to stop that group from spreading to another and another, etc. They'd all just combind eventually. Unless someone stopped them... which would lose the general point...
I'm with you on this. Anarchy, no matter how well-intentioned, would descend very quickly into chaos. Some sort of system is needed to keep order and deal with crime.
TrainSpotting
Geek
TrainSpotting
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 378
December 13th, 2007 at 08:38am
Anarchy is just as ridiculous and just as sensicle as any other form of government.
Anji
Basket Case
Anji
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 15914

Blog
December 13th, 2007 at 11:20am
Ol' Blue Eyes.:
Santa:
So... I'm gonna stay with my thinking and that it's chaos Coolio
But really, the small group idea wouldn't work too well either because who's to stop that group from spreading to another and another, etc. They'd all just combind eventually. Unless someone stopped them... which would lose the general point...
I'm with you on this. Anarchy, no matter how well-intentioned, would descend very quickly into chaos. Some sort of system is needed to keep order and deal with crime.
Anarchy isn't the lack of a system either. Animals, well most of them, do live in anarchaic societies.

In order for anarchy to work with people, materialistic obsession must be taken away. Since that isn't going to happen, it's highly unlikely that anarchy can sucessfully work.

Anarchists pre-20th cenuary used to just oppose the government, i.e. the French Revolution where there sorta was or appeared to be a redistribution of power. It's not structure or order or law that it necessarily opposes, it's the power corruption. So it's like ultimate socialism. Complete, ultimate socialsim, in which every individual has the same worth as the next. The thing which seperates anarchism from socialism is, well, the spelling no doubt, but also there are disputes about the equality of rights and economic value in the society and property ownership, etc. In socialism, of course as Robert Owen experimented with his sociology tests, is total equal rights, wages, land, wealth, working hours, and all. But in his model, there were four like factory supervisors, so there are people with more power who do govern, but the rules are applicable to them as well.

There's a bit of a language barrier because anarchy in the english language does appear to be a contradiction. Rules or law, is often associated with a ruler or government which would impose these rules. In other languages, I believe Croatian is one of them, there are two different words to distiguish the meanings.

Have you ever read the novel Perfume? Or at least seen the movie. Yeah, it's all about anarchy.
Register