The Instigator
cookie1
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
KDanquah
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Government is unnecesary and unjust and should be abolished.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/14/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 699 times Debate No: 61689
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

cookie1

Pro

Hey guys,
I am pro/for, this means that I agree with the statement, I am looking for an opponent that believes government is necessary.
Obviously the fact that I am against government makes me an anarchist but I am an ANARCHO-CAPITALIST not a socialist.
Definitions-
Anarcho-capitalism- A market based society with no government. Instead of government all goods and services would be provided by private business.
Government- The governing body of a nation, state or community.
Unnecesary- Not needed
Unjust- Not based on behaving according to what is morally right or fair.
The only rules are that the first round is for acceptance only.
The use of sources is advised but my arguments tend to be largely based on logic.
KDanquah

Con

I agree that in this day and this age, government has evolved into more of a corporation than a governing body, and makes society unfair. However government in general serves a few purposes: legislature, defense of the people, and the streamlining of economy and business. Anarchy cannot work. Humans by nature are not singular animals. People will flock together and create groups usually with some sort of hierarchy or methodology of how to obtain needs and wants. This in itself defines government. And in the event that these small groups arise, loners will quickly be divvied up, wiped out, or continue to survive as a small population. But once a particular group becomes strong the likelihood is that many will join/ally themselves with this group and create a conglomerate. This would continue on large scales until many of the groups become state sized. The evidence is within history beginning with paleolithic and hunter gatherer societies.

Law is an integral part of government. Without laws, the base nature of humanity would shine through. Although the laws created within the past 200 or so years have been skewed to fight for the privileged, they for the most part, have reduced the amount of murders, thefts and rapes within a large population. On small scales this would not be a problem. But if the U.S. someday lost government and was replaced with an anarchist system, mass panic and crime would ensue. Because of law women are much much safer than they would have been in any society lacking law or rules.

Government also serves to protect those involved in it. Relying on oneself seems like a very capitalist and American value, but the actuality is that rarely is one person solely responsible for their success. The American government does a lot to help those that need help and protect those that need protection, in comparison to the loneliness of perhaps a small anarchist nuclear family. The simple fact of the matter is Darwinism would rule. Intelligence strength and speed would be the defining factors of ones value when it comes to obtaining wants and needs. If someone is weak in those areas but is gifted in -say- the arts, they would quickly lose value within society.

Government in the nineteenth and twentieth century began a wonderfully terrifying thing: globalization. Markets have arisen all over the world connecting everyone on this earth with access to letters or the internet. This has made trillions upon trillions of dollars for many people all over the world. Has this led to a hedonistic and morally corrupt society? Yes. Has this led to the gap between socioeconomic class being tripled and quadrupled? Yes. Has it benefited most everyone in the world? Without a doubt. You cannot argue the economic stance when it comes to government.

In short, government is entirely a human creation. We cannot escape it as humans because we crave companionship and family. Anarchy will never work because of its failure to accept all at face value rather than government making use of all.
Debate Round No. 1
cookie1

Pro

To begin with, I did state that first round is for acceptance only but this is fine, you must skip the final round though to make the argument fair.

I stated firstly that the state is unjust.
I will now present my case for this then afterwards I will state my case for my statement that government is unnecesary and finally I would like to explain why it should be finished. Lastly I will rebut a few of your points.

Government is unjust.
This is very simple and it is a principle I, and everyone should remember as they live their lives. You own yourself and I own myself. This is a basic, fair and justified principle and government doesn't comply with it. How can you agree when every second we are being governed and controlled by other human beings, I don't know about you but I don't need to be controlled by laws made by a group of men that I didn't elect. Do you really think that as soon as the government is abolished everyone will lose their minds and start robbing people and murdering people.
news.heartland.org/editorial/2013/01/16/laws-dont-stop-us-committing-crimes-we-stop-ourselves
This article explains my point perfectly. I'll come back to this later. Still, I believe this is proof that government is unjust, do we voluntarily agree to this system? No, then we are forced to comply, am I wrong? This makes the system unjust on its own, have I done something wrong? If not then why am I being forced to be ruled by a small elite group.

Government is unnecesary.
Government is unnecesary because like i said before, I don't need to be ruled neither do you. Does the law prevent criminals from breaking it? Nope clearly not. Murderers dont consider the law when they go on shooting sprees, nor do robbers when they rob a store, robbers are victims of government, because of government regulation on small businesses there are less jobs for people to go to which creates poverty, poverty increases crime so therefore government creates crime by regulating businesses.

Rebuttals -
"Defense of the people"
Government doesn't care about the worth of human life, how do I know this? Because governments constantly order bombings on civilian areas to get rid of terrorists, most of the time they just kill civilians.
www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/obama-drone-program-anniversary_n_4654825.html
As you can see government shows total disregard for human life, and they dont defend people they just murder them and call it collateral damage.

"and the streamlining of economy and business."
Really? Government regulations slow economic flow to a snails pace.
www.pfhub.com/the-top-6-ways-that-obama-is-ruining-our-economy/

"The American government does a lot to help those that need help and protect those that need protection"
No the american government don't do this, the american people are forced to do this through taxes and what happens if they don't comply? They are threatened at gunpoint to give their money to the government and if they don't they are thrown in a cage.

Anarchism is natural, when a child is born he doesn't naturally follow the orders given to him without explanation. He must be punished and learn to follow orders. This is humanity at its most natural state refusing to follow orders inexplicably.
KDanquah

Con

KDanquah forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
cookie1

Pro

cookie1 forfeited this round.
KDanquah

Con

KDanquah forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
cookie1

Pro

cookie1 forfeited this round.
KDanquah

Con

KDanquah forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
Im definitely open to a rematch ASAP ive been buried in work recently but if someone was to challenge me to this debate I would certainly accept.
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
Haha unlucky, I will probably have another debate like this in the future
Posted by Emilirose 2 years ago
Emilirose
Con beat me to it.
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
Feel free to accept then
Posted by Vox_Ipsa_Natura 2 years ago
Vox_Ipsa_Natura
Challenge accepted.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
Good luck on this one, you have three points to prove for the resolution to stand. However your opponent can always argue that your proposed system is more unjust, and win on that.
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
@MaesterAemon Debate me bro, I've changed my mind, consider yourself officially challenged.
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
No I disagree you saying dictionary definitions aren't accurate politically is ridiculous. Dictionary defintions are DEFINITIONS, also if you advocate tax (which as your a socialist I guess you are) you are not an anarchist.
Posted by MaesterAemon 2 years ago
MaesterAemon
While you are obviously trying to associate yourself with the anarchist tradition by using the word "anarcho" or by calling yourself "anarchists" your ideas are distinctly at odds with those associated with anarchism as a political as well as a social movement. As a result, any claims that your ideas are anarchist is simply false.

You claim to be anarchist because you say that they oppose government ( You use a dictionary definition of anarchism). However you fail to appreciate anarchism as a political theory. Dictionaries are rarely politically sophisticated, this meaning they fail to recognize that anarchism is more than just opposition to the idea of government, it is also marked a opposition to capitalism (i.e. exploitation and private property). Opposition to government is a necessary condition but not sufficient for being an anarchist -- you also need to be opposed to exploitation and capitalist private property. As you do not hold interest, rent and profits (i.e. capitalism) to be exploitative nor oppose capitalist conception of property rights, you aren't an anarchist.
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
MaesterAemon As I cant send you a message I would be interested in debating you on a sort of free market vs socialism debate similar to the one I have already done. Let me know if you would accept, but ill do it after a few days as I am currently in two debates.
No votes have been placed for this debate.