The Instigator
free-man
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Raymond_Reddington
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

Anarchy V.S. Monarchy Pro Anarchy or Con Monarchy

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 5 votes the winner is...
Raymond_Reddington
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/18/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 985 times Debate No: 56812
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (5)

 

free-man

Pro

Anarchy V.S. Monarchy
Which do you think is better?

I personally believe that Anarchy is better but in order to understand what I mean I have to define my terms to me Anarchy is a society or country that follows the non-aggression principle which plainly states you can do whatever you want as long as you are not hurting anyone or anyone property who would enforce this the individual people, private militias, or security forces. I see Monarchy as having a King or Queen being the all-powerful head government whatever he or she says go's. So the reason behind my choosing is that I rather live in peace and be able to do what I want (as long as I'm not hurting anyone or anything) instead of having to bow to some King or Queen.
Raymond_Reddington

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
free-man

Pro

free-man forfeited this round.
Raymond_Reddington

Con

Pro forfeited so to keep the debate fair I will wait for him to present his argument next round before I start mine.
Debate Round No. 2
free-man

Pro

free-man forfeited this round.
Raymond_Reddington

Con

That's disappointing. I'll keep my arguments brief.

An absolute Monarchy has huge potential to benefit the citizens economically and socially. The use of a single economic system such as capitalism or socialism could potentially benefit the entire country. Saudi Arabia is a good example. One of the wealthiest nations in the world is an absolute Monarchy. It also simplifies the law and speeds up trials since it is all up to one man. An absolute monarchy has potential to be a great country when paired with a good leader. A good example is Louis the XIV of France who valued the State enough to focus on it's well being. (https://www.princeton.edu...)
That is the sole difficulty. The odds of having a trustworthy and honorable leader are far greater than having a successful anarchic society.

An anarchy is according to Oxford English Dictionaries "Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal." To maintain anarchy there cannot be a public enforcer of laws. There can be no laws. We would immediately see a descent into complete disorder, and like Pro claimed private militias/security forces would rise up. If it ever reached the point that a single militia obtained control of the country it would cease to be anarchy. Therefore we have militias at war with one another, extreme violence, and many deaths. There would also be no way to ensure militias actually enforced the law. Militias would likely be the prime lawbreakers and frequently abuse citizens. It would be an ineffective way to enforce any principles. People would have no reason to not cheat others in business with an ineffective law. Anarchy would lead to a disorganized and dangerous society.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Themba 3 years ago
Themba
free-manRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: pro FF.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 3 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
free-manRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by ArcTImes 3 years ago
ArcTImes
free-manRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
free-manRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by ChosenWolff 3 years ago
ChosenWolff
free-manRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, con naturally filled his BOP