So, Anarchy- the lack of, of severe limiting of, government.

It's time we have a discussion.

Anarchy- good or bad?

retarded utopian ideology that's literally impossible to achieve

And it's pushed by the same (((people))) that want to collapse republics but know people resent communism.

Basically just fucking communists or commie sympathisers.


Utopian? Impossible? Many societies exist currently with no government, usually, though, the government, in those situations, are present, but, almost powerless.

Stupid question, it's obviously bad

Communist relies on the government having near total power. Anarchy relies on NO government, or very, very little government. Also, you're Canadian. Canadians may as well be Communists

And can you support your opinion?

Do you think communism is good or bad?


Insults don't help you here.

Stefan Molyneux is a self-proclaimed anarchist.

Really? I was not aware of that. Either way, what's your opinion?

And Anarchists want no government, Communists want full power to the Government.

Anarchy would never work. If anarchy were to happen it would look like something out of the film "The road".


It's got a bad name now because it's associated with the extreme left when in reality it's more of a rightist philosophy. It's just a very extreme form of libertarianism.

Decent idea in theory, the smaller government the better, but human nature especially that of sociopaths or people with low IQs and lower impulse control, ultimately means that we all have to live under the boot of the state in order to prevent an unstable and unpredictable society.

I don't think it would descend into a Mad Max style scenario as some people automatically believe, but life would be in no way as secure or "comfortable" as it is now.

Technically speaking, anarchy is the ultimate freedom. However with it comes the ultimate price.

one way or the other, complete anarchy will never be achieved. Human nature is to gather in groups and appoint leaders, a thing which later develops into governments later into civilization.

To me, anarchy is cool from a fictional point of view. Living the anarchistic lifestyle? probably not so much.

it would depend on the government

so a third world shithole? No thanks

"The true evil, indeed, the only evil, are the social conventions and ~
fictions whIch become superimposed on natural realities, everything
from family to money, from religion to the state. We are born man or woman, I mean, we are born to grow into adult men and
women; we are not born, in terms of natural justice, to be a husband or to be rich or poor, just as we are not born to be Catholic or
Protestant, to be Portuguese or English. All these things are social fictions.

>Fernando Pessoa, the anarchist banker.

Or, with the people being the ultimate power, the individual having more power than the group, morals and ethics will be enforced, with things like murder being something which carries the ultimate, painful price

No government could possibly best Anarchy

Those are places where the government is powerless due to the mob rule and the criminal nature. Not places where the citizens decided they wanted anarchy

There's no such thing as a "State," only people believing that they live in one. There isn't a need to "rebel" in order to achieve anarchism (which is what you mean by "anarchy"), all humans live anarchically to a greater or lesser degree. When all people take possession of themselves, the State will cease to exist, because it is only a notion in the head.

So, is it "good" or "bad"? It's neither; it is, in fact, the only way to live.

The people would be free to form their own governments, if they so desired.

So in an anarchist society what keeps me from gathering superior numbers and taking all your shit by force?

I mean removal of the government, not the denial of it.

The fact that people would retaliate. And, in that situation, only two numbers matter

1. The amount of bullets we have
2. The lack of fucks I would give about blowing your head off for trying to touch my shit.

Yes, the police who arrest you, the judge who convicts you, and the iron bars that deny you freedom after you are caught trying to take something without paying are definitely "all in your head"

Ridiculous post

See my reply to the same post

Human beings naturally form hierarchies within a society. Once these are established you have the beginnings of the state. Some sort of ultra egalitarian commune where all are equal is just a naive dream.

Anarchy is not a self-sustaining form of government. The people are free to form those hierarchies. They are also free to NOT do so. Meritocracies are inevitable, governments are not

By denying it, you remove it, i.e. annihilate it. You don't need to "remove" something that doesn't exist anyway.

All people and physical things. I never denied any of these. I deny and do away with the system that gives these things "legitimacy" or "sacredness." I will "murder" (in the sense of legal "wrongful" killing) if it suits me, i.e. if I benefit from it.

And this is why anarchists are seen as chaotic sociopaths. Denying a government only works if everyone, including the enforcers, do too. Government has to be torn down, not just denied

Current government is a bunch of losers, doesn't mean, the concept is flawed.
There are some arguments against anarchy, obviously not your cool black and red symbol.

With no structure there is no society

>Anarchy- good or bad?
as the people who are in it

just like everything else

Arguments like what?

Governments have always been filled with "losers". It's universal. It's perpetual. It's FLAWED.

it's called reality, la condition humaine, fucking cookie law

Governments are an evil that has allowed for systematic oppression and an illusion of freedom. It's really just the freedoms that the Government deems it necessary to give the citizens so they can maintain the oppressive government's status

I somewhat support it because fuck you, I do what I want


Humies are hardwired to form a new hierarchy when the old one collapses.

Because of this, anarchy doesnt last.

And we have some examples of what turns up in place of a government in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Somalia.

Just think, who is best positioned to become the dominant force in say... the US when the rules go out the window?

Nobody, because no one force has the numbers and resources to seize power. Only groups poised to do so would not have a chance.

I forgot to answer the ME problem you posed.

Those are what happens when a religion is poised to take over. That's not what would happen in America, or in more developed countries

infidel, it's not 'governments', it's 'evil governments ...'

What's the difference?

definitely islam and jews

definetaly NOT islam and jews

You're from Belgium, don't you love the Muslims and Jews?

Well ok it was a shit example. I thought the combined US military and police force branches would have a strong case but of course fucking everyone has guns over there.

Only poised to take over? ME is already dominated by theocratic states and even if they vanished tomorrow the people already have thier ingrained culture to fall back on.

They wouldnt form a unified government, but they would still get thier shit together faster than anyone else in a global anarchy senario.

Its literally communism 2.0
It could work if every human wanted to help another and go out of his way to do so, took only what he absolutely needs and nothing more.
But humans are not like that.
If a group of criminals were to gather some numbers and start stirring up shit, you think there would be some great number of wonderful humans that just want to help gathering to stop them? Fuck no, the person not affected by them will give absolutely no shit. The only people thatd have anything against them are the people affected and what are you going to have in such a situation? Shootouts across the city?

fuck off, power guy

What are your plans after high school user ?

Neither. Just retarded shit only NEETS would consider.

srsly, inflation is stealing from the elderly, not some social action

jason unruhe makes mince meat of you

"This" is why you think anarchists are seen that way, you mean. It isn't my fault that you and others are spooked by the word "murder," or "wrongful killing," which verges on nonsense anyway. I may commit a "wrongful killing" according to the State, but I will not, by the word's very definition, commit a murder according to myself.

I deny the government, and it works for me. When confronted by a cop, I deceive him into believing I am a law abiding citizen. As long as I accomplish this, I needn't concern myself with any other aspects of the government. In this way, I live effectively in anarchism.

Um, most people see murder as WRONG. Not my fault most people have a sense of morality.

I don't want government to control every single aspect of my life, but then again I don't want to live in some hippie commune either. My biggest concern is how crime would be handled, and that NAP shit would get really out of hand from the very first infringement.

>hey that guy is a rapist! GET HIM!
>oops he was not a rapist, I guess I'm the criminal now
>what are they fighting over and why is that mob stomping on that guy? GET THEM!
>hey what's going on her- GET HIM!

And then the whole neighborhood is in full warfare. The system we currently have is good because it's protecting the weak and the innocent. Everybody fighting for themselves would just end up in inevitable chaos. Also, what's stopping someone forming their own little army and raiding and raping and murdering every single town in their path? The police? The army? The people would probably team up and fight, but then again what the fuck is the point when you could avoid the whole fucking conflict to begin with by not fistfucking the system to the ground?

Anarchism makes no sense.

we are all racist white supremacist killers, the question is, how do we get on ?
for some mysterious way I'm not, who the fuck to care of that ?
I have no clue, I just act out, and someone should seriously take care of that

government is a bunch of whiny women trying to get what they want
they are not the problem
also fuck eu, also fuck google

your realise, only posts that are approved by google make it, right ?

di bi o evial my ass, fuckign morfons

Anarchy is absolutely perfect. Best system possible, except for the fact that those subjected to it can't be perfect. Same with communism/socialism/welfare-niggerism. Some one will always take advantage of it. For anarchy the obvious thing is crimes go unpunished so crime increases, and of course we need some sort of structure/leader to tell people what to do. I would argue the superiority of most world leaders/politcians is lacking, but the ignorant need teachers, the laborers need to be directed where to labor etc.
Communism similarly is perfect. Real communism is inherently anarchic, but the only thing we've seen is forced, for various reasons this made places like the USSR absolute shit holes. Marx himself knew communism needed capitalism first. I expect we'll reach real communism at some point when we can achieve a truly and naturally globalized world and culture. This won't be in our life time, but the world is already homogenizing. At some point as technology improves we'll all be connected better, we already can talk to anyone anywhere in the world instantly. Think of 100 years ago how they'd marvel and how the telegram and to go a step further even mail in achaemenid persia changed society. Automation will play a big role in this too. We'll never achieve perfect communism, but we'll get damn close and without a card carrying party member jamming a gun down our assholes or government prostate exams that reach our throats. Not anytime in our lifetime though.
If your brother's house burned down you would offer him yours for a time. Eventually this attitude will reach globally on a much larger scale and a real commune will develop. But conflict is inevitable. I believe it'll happen one day. Just think of the men in Lascaux france, what their reaction would be to the british empire

fuck off google, you are wrong and you know it, you are powerfull, but you fuck are wrong and you know it

fucking jews

basically mobsters, that explains bibi
also fuck islam

there is a power vacuum
before you sell a solution, understand the problem, nigger

Fucking samefagging this much. Fuck off faggot!

sorry, I was on a roll
but fuck ggoolgle

fuck off gay pink guy, you no nigger

There isn't a society that exists without government, just ones that exists without what is recognized as one. Anarchy tries to claim that no one will ever seize power, which has never happened in the history of humanity. Even shitty gangs have leaders and hierarchies.

Forms into a dictatorship in 3 seconds. As soon as someone is bigger, stronger, smarter, has more resources or has better weapons then those around them.

lol, mu actiual reply aborted, by google, fucking jimbecil

Anarchy creates a power vacuum which is either quickly filled by another organised political vacuum or people who support Anarchy end up having to fill the power vacuum themselves to enforce Anarchy which then kind of defeats what Anarchy is in the first place and it just becomes authoritarian.

I'm going to run your anarchy like my bitch

fuckl google

also fuck those opposing goole

fuck off cunt I'm your worst enemly don't pretend i'm your side, I fucking hate you floag bith

it might be more complicated

if humanity would grow up and people would start acting responsible for their shit it would be the best thing to ever happen. you cant corrupt a government that doesnt exist, and when people decide to fuck shit up on a grand scale we just gather which pitchforks and torches like in the good old times and solve the shit ourselves. in fact we do live in an anarchy. everyone can do as they please. its just that many got brainwashed into supporting a system that keeps humanity down for the sake of a few. if the memes of the government would stop working suddenly it all would fall apart and people would be free as all it takes is for the people to stop believing the memes of the government.
the memes are how the elite stayed in power. Since the pharaos and probably before the rulers memed how they are all powerfull with the might of god aiding them. For that reason they let themselves get carried around, built huge castles, have huge military parades, all to meme they have power to vanquish everything opposing them. That goes on until the invention of the nukes. From then on detterence became controll as the nuke, the ultimate deterrence, could be memed by the enemies too and not be surpassed so far. They now meme how they controll media, letteragencies, education, economy, when in reality its the memes upholding their power. There are only so few with actual ill intent, the rest just follow because the memes work and they feel like they cant change anything either way since they controll everything. If the memes stop working all of the establishment would collapse as even those inside of it mostly only support it out of lack of alternatives or obliviousness. What changed is that after millenia of the memewarfare we finaly learned how the war is fought and can fight back

War has changed

Have you ever met a person competent enough to run his own life,
because I haven't
Of the tens of thousands I've met not once or the thousands of online interviews and such
I've never seen a single person with integrity

Society needs a government but it should be used as a last ditch enforcement of securing society's health like a living being from a cancer not the thing controlling it

which is why I'm for a Theocracy with where gun ownership and training is mandatory, don't allow your citizen's to allow tyranny

Why would anarchists be opposed to racial-ethno based commune? Why must we live in a border-less world? Do anarchists think that humans will cease to compete for scarce resources?

>Hitler digits
Yeah, I'm pretty skeptical of it too.

Communism and anarchism are actually very similar. Anarchism is critical of Marx and Engels' theories of the transition to communism
>state capitalism
>then socialism
>finally communism

Anarchy is a temporary state, not a permanent solution.

Anarcho-anything is absurd because it assumes how people will behave when central organization is taken away.

Anarchy is an ideology for drug-addicts and irresponsible children.

Anarchy = no guaranteed safety
No guaranteed safety = joining a faction
Larger factions grow faster
Factions get so large that they become a country

It's impossible to have an anarchist society because people want security and safety

Love it, fuck the state.