Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

anarchy

mauricio2
Posts: 129
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 11:14:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

*hears the men with guns coming to arrest mauricio2 for being remotely pro-Anarchy*
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 11:58:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 11:14:14 AM, tvellalott wrote:
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

*hears the men with guns coming to arrest mauricio2 for being remotely pro-Anarchy*

men with guns

You must be really glad I gave you that phrase.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 12:00:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 11:58:56 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 6/3/2011 11:14:14 AM, tvellalott wrote:
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

*hears the men with guns coming to arrest mauricio2 for being remotely pro-Anarchy*

men with guns

You must be really glad I gave you that phrase.

I love it.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 4:03:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
It will never happen in any lifetime, because all of mankind will never work together on the same agenda. If we did, then it would be as if we were all mindless robots. The fight between good and bad; between order and chaos; between two opposites; it is what makes the world go round it's in natural law. The world will never be all good or all bad. Therefor mankind will never be on the same agenda.

Order is the governing of chaos, the control of chaos. Therefor, order is the child of it's parent chaos. Order will always come from chaos and chaos will always be there to birth order; to ensure that order is needed. This cycle will never stop.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 7:11:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

People don't have to work together in harmony for anarchy to work. It works when people follow their self interest.(ex. I'm hungry but I have a good amount of currency. You have food or the resources needed to make food but don't have as much currency as you'd like. We both satisfy our self-interest by trading currency for food. You don't have to like me and I don't have to like you. We both simply need to think we will stand to gain from voluntary exchange.)
My manwich!
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 7:55:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 7:11:55 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

People don't have to work together in harmony for anarchy to work. It works when people follow their self interest.(ex. I'm hungry but I have a good amount of currency. You have food or the resources needed to make food but don't have as much currency as you'd like. We both satisfy our self-interest by trading currency for food. You don't have to like me and I don't have to like you. We both simply need to think we will stand to gain from voluntary exchange.)

What you fail to see is the bad side of human nature and this is a repeated mistake of most anarchists. If you have something I want then I will find a way to get it. This could be through my own hard work, through fair trade, through theft, or through force. All of these scenarios are possible. Anarchists do not seem to understand that fair trade only looks like the best option to some people, not all people. Especially if I don't really like you for some reason, maybe I see you yelling at people all the time...or maybe I've seen you hit your wife frequently. Maybe people have been complaining that your trading unfairly instead of fairly. Any of these reasons and alot more could lead a person to get what they want through theft and/or force. Fair trade is only for the fair-hearted. Don't be so naive as to think that all humans are fair-hearted.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 9:54:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 7:55:43 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

What you fail to see is the bad side of human nature and this is a repeated mistake of most anarchists.

You are making an extreme naive argument against anarchy which shows that you are pretty much ignorant of the political theory. Care to debate the assertion that current anarchist theory is completely ignorant of human nature.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 9:57:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 7:55:43 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/3/2011 7:11:55 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

People don't have to work together in harmony for anarchy to work. It works when people follow their self interest.(ex. I'm hungry but I have a good amount of currency. You have food or the resources needed to make food but don't have as much currency as you'd like. We both satisfy our self-interest by trading currency for food. You don't have to like me and I don't have to like you. We both simply need to think we will stand to gain from voluntary exchange.)

What you fail to see is the bad side of human nature and this is a repeated mistake of most anarchists. If you have something I want then I will find a way to get it. This could be through my own hard work, through fair trade, through theft, or through force.

In an anarchist society, one does not have the luxury of being able to tax people to raise funds for their endeavors. If you get a reputation for theft, people are less likely to trade with you. It's usually in one's best interest to trade fairly.

All of these scenarios are possible. Anarchists do not seem to understand that fair trade only looks like the best option to some people, not all people. Especially if I don't really like you for some reason, maybe I see you yelling at people all the time...or maybe I've seen you hit your wife frequently. Maybe people have been complaining that your trading unfairly instead of fairly.

It seems like you're just trying to make up scenarios because you're already biased against an AnCap system. And even if this is how people think, doesn't that give you an incentive to keep good relations with people, not to beat your wife, and to trade fairly? The fact is that an AnCap society is run voluntarily. If you want people to trade with you, you have to act reasonably and fairly.

Any of these reasons and alot more could lead a person to get what they want
through theft and/or force. Fair trade is only for the fair-hearted. Don't be so naive : as to think that all humans are fair-hearted.

Don't be so naive as to think that everyone thinks in terms of force. It was David Friedman that said that the use of force is such a poor solution, only small children and great nations choose to use it. In an AnCap society, you fund the war and so it would be much less frequent than it is now.
My manwich!
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 12:56:41 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Anarchy was, is, and always will be. Anarchy is how things are.

Every so often an institution gains too much power, and every time it does, people get pissed, and it gets over thrown.

There is no such thing as a "monopoly on violence", only a perceived monopoly on violence. The "non-aggression principal" is practical, but naive and idealistic. You can't have a "government enforced anarchy or equality" as some schools of anarchistic thought suggest. It's all a bunch of bullsh!t.

Anarchy is just growing the fvck up, and accepting the world for what it truly is. Life isn't fair. Some people have bigger d!cks. Some are born in poverty, some are born in wealth. Some people, like everyone in this thread other than me, were born of non-reptilian blood, and are as a result inferior. We are not born equal, and we do not die equal.

It's all about playing the game. The game which you all just lost.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 1:18:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 12:56:41 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Anarchy was, is, and always will be. Anarchy is how things are.

No it's not, you just have your own, personal, unorthodox dictionary with no bearing on what people actually mean when they use certain terms. Either that or you're just a retard who doesn't know what words mean.

Every so often an institution gains too much power, and every time it does, people get pissed, and it gets over thrown.

There is no such thing as a "monopoly on violence", only a perceived monopoly on violence.

A state is an aggressive monopolist on arbitration, not a "monopoly on violence." It's aggressive cuz you have to take your disputes to the state and follow its rules. A monopoly exists when there are legal barriers to market entry, which presently is the case. Just because a million years in the future, the monopoly might cease to exist doesn't mean it's not a monopoly, unless we're using the "CosmicAlfonzo Retarded English Dictionary" again.

The "non-aggression principal" is practical, but naive and idealistic.

If it's practical, then by definition, it's not naive and idealistic. Again, you don't now what words mean.

You can't have a "government enforced anarchy or equality" as some schools of anarchistic thought suggest. It's all a bunch of bullsh!t.

What anarchists do you know who want the state to enforce anarchy? That's not even a coherent concept; by definition anarchy entails the absence of a state.

Anarchy is just growing the fvck up, and accepting the world for what it truly is. Life isn't fair. Some people have bigger d!cks. Some are born in poverty, some are born in wealth. Some people, like everyone in this thread other than me, were born of non-reptilian blood, and are as a result inferior. We are not born equal, and we do not die equal.

It's all about playing the game. The game which you all just lost.

K.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 2:13:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 1:18:21 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 6/4/2011 12:56:41 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Anarchy was, is, and always will be. Anarchy is how things are.

No it's not, you just have your own, personal, unorthodox dictionary with no bearing on what people actually mean when they use certain terms. Either that or you're just a retard who doesn't know what words mean.


I know what anarchists mean.

Course, you don't have to believe me. hurp a duuurp

Every so often an institution gains too much power, and every time it does, people get pissed, and it gets over thrown.

There is no such thing as a "monopoly on violence", only a perceived monopoly on violence.

A state is an aggressive monopolist on arbitration, not a "monopoly on violence." It's aggressive cuz you have to take your disputes to the state and follow its rules. A monopoly exists when there are legal barriers to market entry, which presently is the case. Just because a million years in the future, the monopoly might cease to exist doesn't mean it's not a monopoly, unless we're using the "CosmicAlfonzo Retarded English Dictionary" again.


See, the funny thing is, you call yourself an anarchist, but you still think you "have" to do any of this stuff.

The state does have an alleged monopoly on violence. It also has an alleged monopoly on arbitration. It doesn't really.

Of course, the state will get on your case for settling disputes via dual, or doing some vigilante action.. But only if you get caught.

By the way, there are arbitration agencies.. In the United States of all places, even.

The "non-aggression principal" is practical, but naive and idealistic.

If it's practical, then by definition, it's not naive and idealistic. Again, you don't now what words mean.


By the "non aggression-principle" being practical, I meant practical for personal use. My bad.

Otherwise, what is it? It has no effect on reality whatsoever. You can't enforce such a thing. For the most part, this is how people pretend to operate as it is.

You can't have a "government enforced anarchy or equality" as some schools of anarchistic thought suggest. It's all a bunch of bullsh!t.

What anarchists do you know who want the state to enforce anarchy? That's not even a coherent concept; by definition anarchy entails the absence of a state.


Certain socialist type conceptions of anarchism come to mind.

Congratulations on catching why I mentioned it though.

Anarchy is just growing the fvck up, and accepting the world for what it truly is. Life isn't fair. Some people have bigger d!cks. Some are born in poverty, some are born in wealth. Some people, like everyone in this thread other than me, were born of non-reptilian blood, and are as a result inferior. We are not born equal, and we do not die equal.

It's all about playing the game. The game which you all just lost.

K.

That's right. Next time Officer Wolfe is standing over your beaten body because you weren't wearing your seat belt, remember, it is because you a little b!tch.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 2:54:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 9:54:00 PM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/3/2011 7:55:43 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

What you fail to see is the bad side of human nature and this is a repeated mistake of most anarchists.

You are making an extreme naive argument against anarchy which shows that you are pretty much ignorant of the political theory. Care to debate the assertion that current anarchist theory is completely ignorant of human nature.

No Cliff. You keep trying to bait me into non-sense. Give it up. Go play with someone else.
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 3:04:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 9:57:06 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/3/2011 7:55:43 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/3/2011 7:11:55 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/3/2011 11:08:37 AM, mauricio2 wrote:
could anarchy work? i have alot of friends that are anarchist and we always debate about politics and they always talk about how this world would be better with anarchy....i think that for anarchy to work mankind would all have to work together.and by the way anarchy doesnt necessarily mean chaos or distruction. more like no governement and a world with the only rules as the human rights.but i honestly think a world of anarchy is extremly too complicated and it could never happen in our life time.

People don't have to work together in harmony for anarchy to work. It works when people follow their self interest.(ex. I'm hungry but I have a good amount of currency. You have food or the resources needed to make food but don't have as much currency as you'd like. We both satisfy our self-interest by trading currency for food. You don't have to like me and I don't have to like you. We both simply need to think we will stand to gain from voluntary exchange.)

What you fail to see is the bad side of human nature and this is a repeated mistake of most anarchists. If you have something I want then I will find a way to get it. This could be through my own hard work, through fair trade, through theft, or through force.

In an anarchist society, one does not have the luxury of being able to tax people to raise funds for their endeavors. If you get a reputation for theft, people are less likely to trade with you. It's usually in one's best interest to trade fairly.

Why? Why is it in my best interest? If you have a truck that I need and I don't have enough resources to buy it or trade for it... What is to keep me from stealing it or forcing you to give it to me?


All of these scenarios are possible. Anarchists do not seem to understand that fair trade only looks like the best option to some people, not all people. Especially if I don't really like you for some reason, maybe I see you yelling at people all the time...or maybe I've seen you hit your wife frequently. Maybe people have been complaining that your trading unfairly instead of fairly.

It seems like you're just trying to make up scenarios because you're already biased against an AnCap system. And even if this is how people think, doesn't that give you an incentive to keep good relations with people, not to beat your wife, and to trade fairly? The fact is that an AnCap society is run voluntarily. If you want people to trade with you, you have to act reasonably and fairly.

I'm not making up scenarios... wow. The options I listed ARE the options one may choose from in order to obtain something. Biased views have nothing to do with it.


Any of these reasons and alot more could lead a person to get what they want
through theft and/or force. Fair trade is only for the fair-hearted. Don't be so naive : as to think that all humans are fair-hearted.

Don't be so naive as to think that everyone thinks in terms of force. It was David Friedman that said that the use of force is such a poor solution, only small children and great nations choose to use it. In an AnCap society, you fund the war and so it would be much less frequent than it is now.

I never said that all people think in force, so your assumption fails. All humans behave in various ways, not one way. That is what I have stated in this thread. Building a society around the concept that all people are "fair" is very naive. Throw half of my old friends in such a society and they would show you that "fair" is not the way that all people think. As an example, gangs arise naturally and in every society. These "gangs" use theft and force as opposed to fair trade. How would anarchy deal with this.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2011 2:34:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
@Justin_chains
I'm not going to debate anarchy in a thread. If you think your position is defensible, challenge me to a debate.
My manwich!
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2011 8:57:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You see anarchists say those in opposition having failing definitions of key terms involved... And we say the same to anarchists. The thing here is that the scenario does not care what terms are used... Truth will still play out regardless.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2011 9:24:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 2:54:42 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

No Cliff. You keep trying to bait me into non-sense. Give it up. Go play with someone else.

It was a direct quote from you. You just admitted that what you post is nonsense and can not be defended in a debate - good job.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2011 10:01:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/5/2011 8:57:47 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
You see anarchists say those in opposition having failing definitions of key terms involved... And we say the same to anarchists. The thing here is that the scenario does not care what terms are used... Truth will still play out regardless.

Are you gonna debate?
My manwich!