The Instigator
elfscribe
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
paDONix
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

An anarchy is better than an oppresive government

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/13/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 997 times Debate No: 38829
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

elfscribe

Pro

An anarchy is defined here as a society with no government. I hope my opponent will follow this structure:

Stating of Opinion (1st Round)
Opening Statement (2nd Round)
1st Rebuttal
2nd Rebuttal
Closing Statement

Lastly, I wish you good luck. Enjoy the debate!


I firmly believe that a society with no government functions far better than one with an oppressive government.
paDONix

Con

I believe that anarchy is worse than an oppressive government in terms of how a nation is run on the basis of the nature of anarchism.
Debate Round No. 1
elfscribe

Pro

An anarchy is better than an oppressive government because an oppressive government causes harm both mentally and physically to its people. Consider the Nazi government under Hitler. Millions of Jews as well as Communists, homosexuals, mentally unhealthy people and Jehovah's Witnesses were sent to death camp, brutally tortured, and killed. (Goldhagen 1996) However, if there had been no government, the Holocaust, as well as Stalin's Gulag, would not have happened, and the millions of prisoners killed might have lived. A tragic example of how an oppressive government is better than no government would be North Korea, where the leaders waste their money on building atomic bombs while their people die in labor camps and starve.

Another reason that an anarchy is less oppressive than an oppressive government is that an anarchy offers its people freedom of speech, action and religion. I would like to c=give North Korea as an example again. We know very little about North Korea, but one thing we do know is that the country allows its citizens almost no freedom of speech, whereas a country without a government would have no restrictions as to speech and action.
paDONix

Con

Anarchy is a nice concept if you look at it from a purely ideological standpoint. But then so was Communism. And, like Communism, it could not work in the modern era. And it shall be doomed for the same reasons why Communism fell. It does not take into account human nature to consider one's own interests first and all else afterwards.
Humans are not the saintly beings which we could wish that they were. Instead they are lustful, greedy for power and envious of those who have achieved more than themselves. Anarchy would include the removal of law and order as we know. This would not be a problem were all humans rational, law-abiding citizens. However, judging by the documents on https://www.gov.uk... , this is certainly not the case. Remember, laws had to be implemented in the first place for a reason. Anarchy would lead to the most unfair type of dog eat dog situation where those with privileged upbringing reign supreme and those without affluent parents forever suffer. And this is not the sort of world which people wish to live in. An oppressive government at least protects some in society, if not all. But in anarchy, nothing is safe...
Debate Round No. 2
elfscribe

Pro

Admittedly, since there are no laws in an anarchy, criminals would remain unpunished, but in my opinion that is far better than a government that tortures and punishes citizens who have done nothing except express their opinions against the government.

My opponent made a very good point about anarchy being an impossible, utopian dream. However, though it might not be exactly the utopia we expect, it cannot be worse than the havoc an oppressive government wreaks. I'd like to cite the current states of Ethiopia and Eritrea as an example. The people are poor, starving even, while the government takes away any chance of a happier life by waging war when it could be helping its impoverished citizens rebuild their lives. Thousands of orphans and widows could use the money the government spends on war. In an anarchy, where there is no government, charity organizations can handle money more efficiently. Though there might be some corruption in charities, there is generally less corruption in good organizations than in most governments.
paDONix

Con

paDONix forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
elfscribe

Pro

elfscribe forfeited this round.
paDONix

Con

paDONix forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
elfscribe

Pro

elfscribe forfeited this round.
paDONix

Con

paDONix forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.