I’m not sure you know what anarchy means. You might be thinking of direct democracy. Even that has issues with tyranny of the majority and market forces being leveraged to curtail freedom outside of government control. I’m a social libertarian myself, because government intervention is required to curtail abuse of market forces.
Direct democracy is one of the system proposed for Anarchist governance. Direct democracy is just a system. It can be part of many political ideas. Anarchy just means there isn’t hierarchy. Direct democracy facilitates this, correct? There are no rulers, and everyone is equal in voting.
Direct democracy makes the majority into an authority over the minority. You are also going to have to enforce those laws. That means cops and, more importantly, judges. That is unless you plan to try every single criminal in a national referendum. Or you could put them in front of unsupervised juries, in which case you might as well codify it as legalized lynching.
I love people who are so confident that they’re the first people to think of something. You assume you must be correct just because you feel strongly about it. This has all been considered. Here’s the Anarchist wiki, for your perusal. You might learn something there if you’re actually open to learning.
I love it that you assume I should know or care that there is an anarchist wiki. No, I certainly don’t think I was the first to think of anything, and no, you have given me no reason to want to “learn something”. I studied philosophy of government in college and have read the anarchy page on Wikipedia, have you done either?
Give me one reason why I should bother with your (presumably) anarchist fanfic smartass and maybe I’ll bother.
The fact you first think reading a single wiki page is sufficient, and also mention the wrong page, makes this hilarious. Little a anarchy is not the same as big A Anarchism. Anarchism is the political thought. Yes, I’ve read it.
Give me one reason why I should bother with your (presumably) anarchist fanfic smartass and maybe I’ll bother.
Because you have a curious mind and want to be informed. You’d rather know the solutions others have come up with for your hypothetical problems than to think no one has considered it. You’d rather find out you were uninformed and learned something new instead of thinking refusing to learn makes you feel right.
If I don’t study conservapedia, it’s not because I don’t have a curious mind or want to be informed. How is this any different.
BTW, I went and looked up “Law” on your wiki, and fuck if it didn’t confirm that I had it exactly right. The only substance on the page makes it clear that laws and Anarchism are not compatible. The rest is a bunch of hand waving nonsense about community standards.
BTW: The Wikipedia entry on “Anarchist Law” makes a hell of a better case for it. You should have sent me there.
The prehistoric… Prehistoric, like “before history”? Like, before anyone would have written things down. That’s pretty convenient. Call me skeptical that they had no hierarchies or violence. Especially given that primitive primates today have hierarchies and are known to have “wars” between neighboring groups,
How did they deal with drunk assholes driving 70 miles an hour past a playground?
I’m not sure you know what anarchy means. You might be thinking of direct democracy. Even that has issues with tyranny of the majority and market forces being leveraged to curtail freedom outside of government control. I’m a social libertarian myself, because government intervention is required to curtail abuse of market forces.
https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca1
Direct democracy is one of the system proposed for Anarchist governance. Direct democracy is just a system. It can be part of many political ideas. Anarchy just means there isn’t hierarchy. Direct democracy facilitates this, correct? There are no rulers, and everyone is equal in voting.
Direct democracy makes the majority into an authority over the minority. You are also going to have to enforce those laws. That means cops and, more importantly, judges. That is unless you plan to try every single criminal in a national referendum. Or you could put them in front of unsupervised juries, in which case you might as well codify it as legalized lynching.
I love people who are so confident that they’re the first people to think of something. You assume you must be correct just because you feel strongly about it. This has all been considered. Here’s the Anarchist wiki, for your perusal. You might learn something there if you’re actually open to learning.
I love it that you assume I should know or care that there is an anarchist wiki. No, I certainly don’t think I was the first to think of anything, and no, you have given me no reason to want to “learn something”. I studied philosophy of government in college and have read the anarchy page on Wikipedia, have you done either?
Give me one reason why I should bother with your (presumably) anarchist fanfic smartass and maybe I’ll bother.
The fact you first think reading a single wiki page is sufficient, and also mention the wrong page, makes this hilarious. Little a anarchy is not the same as big A Anarchism. Anarchism is the political thought. Yes, I’ve read it.
Because you have a curious mind and want to be informed. You’d rather know the solutions others have come up with for your hypothetical problems than to think no one has considered it. You’d rather find out you were uninformed and learned something new instead of thinking refusing to learn makes you feel right.
If I don’t study conservapedia, it’s not because I don’t have a curious mind or want to be informed. How is this any different.
BTW, I went and looked up “Law” on your wiki, and fuck if it didn’t confirm that I had it exactly right. The only substance on the page makes it clear that laws and Anarchism are not compatible. The rest is a bunch of hand waving nonsense about community standards.
BTW: The Wikipedia entry on “Anarchist Law” makes a hell of a better case for it. You should have sent me there.
The prehistoric southern levenant was peaceful for over 10,000 years despite not having any laws or police.
Source
Just gonna drop this info here. 👆
The prehistoric… Prehistoric, like “before history”? Like, before anyone would have written things down. That’s pretty convenient. Call me skeptical that they had no hierarchies or violence. Especially given that primitive primates today have hierarchies and are known to have “wars” between neighboring groups,
How did they deal with drunk assholes driving 70 miles an hour past a playground?