The Instigator
Merrit
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Merda
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Anarchy doesn't work.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
Merda
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,610 times Debate No: 16832
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Merrit

Pro

Hello, I am debating that Anarchy will not work.

Rules:

Round 1: Acceptance


Round 2:
Present Reasoning

Round 3:
Defend Reasoning/Present new reasoning

Round4 :
Final Remarks


Merda

Con

As to definitions of the terms of the resolution, the specific form of anarchy that I will be defending is Anarcho-Capitalism(here-on referred to as AnCap). It is best defined as:

The political philosophy and theory that (A)the State is an unnecessary evil and should be abolished, and (B)a free-market private property economic system is morally permissible.[1]

Working will be defined as "to function; operate"[2]

As per rules, I will not bring an argument this round, but will allow my opponent to begin.

[1] http://www.ozarkia.net...
[2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Merrit

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for excepting the debate. �I will now continue my claim that anarchy would not work. �Reasoning:

1) In order for Anarchy to work, the entire world would have to be Anarchists. Let's say if the United States was an Anarchy, other world powers would think of it as free land. Afterall, we wouldn't have a military...at least not an organized or an effective one. If the entire world was an Anarchy, then I will proceed to my next argument.

2) Crime and theft would increase, and drug use would skyrocket. Our communities would no longer be safe without police. Since their would be no government, there would be nobody to keep them in line.�

3) People would't do their job. If you're not getting payed, then why should you keep designing buildings? Their would be no bankers, no engineers no nothing except for farmers farming for themselves. How would we obtain food? If the world was perfect, anarchy might possibly work, but the world isn't perfect. If there was no government, the world would be unorganized, and nobody would be kept in line.

Conclusion (for round 1): Anarchy might possible work if the world was perfect, and the whole world would have to be anarchy

Thank you. I await my opponents response.�
Merda

Con

My opponent has brought three reasons which he claims make anarchy(AnCap) unable to work in the real world. I will summarize them in a short manner and then refute them below.

1.) In order for AnCap to work, the entire world would need to be anarchists.

In this argument, my opponent claims that other countries would probably just claim the "free land". This argument runs into a difficulty though. It assumes that the only way for people to defend themselves is by having a government to facilitate it. What evidence does he bring to support this claim? AnCap's solve this problem with the concept of private defense agencies. With a private defense agency, a person or a group of people form a voluntary contract with said defense agency and pay the defense agency to defend them from intrusions on their person or property. The defense agency has an incentive to form steady and long lasting relationships with it's clients in order to keep those clients and so as to keep a good reputation with other would-be customers.

2) Crime and theft would increase, and drug use would skyrocket.

Same point as the first one I made. Police need not be paid by the government. It is also not too far fetched the idea that some landlords would offer tenants protection of their property in a contractual lease, much like providing water or electricity. And as to the claim that drug use would increase in an anarchist society, that is actually probably true. Though my opponent does not show why it is a bad thing. Unless by drug use, he means forcing others to inject heroin into their bodies, people smoking bud, taking acid, smoking crack or any other drug is not the business of another person.

3) People would't do their job.

How does my opponent conclude this? He does know that the system of anarhcy I am defending is specifically anarcho-capitalism right? This is a society where goods and services are provided completely by the free market. This means that people with resources provide things that others want for services(ex. labor, currency). AnCap is different from other more popular forms of anarchism in that it does not seek to abolish the free market.

I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 2
Merrit

Pro

Merrit forfeited this round.
Merda

Con

Extend arguments and refutations. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
Merrit

Pro

Merrit forfeited this round.
Merda

Con

Unfortunately my opponent has forfeited yet again. Extend arguments and refutations again and vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Merrit 6 years ago
Merrit
None taken.
Posted by Merda 6 years ago
Merda
I thought it would be more technical. No offense.
Posted by Merrit 6 years ago
Merrit
It's not fun?
Posted by Merda 6 years ago
Merda
I thought this would be a fun debate. :(
Posted by annhasle 6 years ago
annhasle
Go Merda!! :D

*cheers*
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by mcc1789 6 years ago
mcc1789
MerritMerdaTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Well...Pro caved at the first shot. That was disappointing. Well done Merda.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
MerritMerdaTied
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: Forfeit.