Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If there is critical mass of people with a mentality that is intolerant of anarchy, it pretty much destroys the argument for anarchy.The classic violent statist mentality.
Anarchism does not allow for the instigation of violence, but it does warrant self defense
Full Definition of anarchy
1
a : absence of government
b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
If there is critical mass of people with a mentality that is intolerant of anarchy, it pretty much destroys the argument for anarchy.The classic violent statist mentality.
You clearly have no interest in persuading people your system is better. Therefore it is something that would never be possible.
Have fun living in a fantasy world.
Full Definition of anarchy
1
a : absence of government
b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
Those are all bullshit arguments created by the 99.50% of statists that understand nothing about anarchism.
Anarchism derives from the greek word Archon, which means ruler. Anarchists believe in no rulers. In other words...
I don't mind no taxation, as long as those who don't want it, are willing to forego everything those taxes pay for. Including healthcare, education, the use of roads, the ability to protect from foreign invasions and so much more.How can you justify all the great things you maintain government does when the fundamental means of support and funding include violence and theft? The means need to justify the ends, and violence and theft are an evil means to an evil end.
There is no difference between a state and a street gang. There is no difference when the mafia extorts money for protection and stations two goons at your place of business, and when the government extorts money for protection and puts a police department on your block.
It always comes down to the social contract argument. That one bullshit theory that statists hinge the moral legitimacy of the state on. No matter how many times I point out the fallacies and the errors, you tools will clinch on to your beloved social contract.
Daily addition to the wall of wisdom...
Not true at all.
If there is critical mass of people with a mentality that is intolerant of anarchy, it pretty much destroys the argument for anarchy.
You clearly have no interest in persuading people your system is better.
Yes, you've mentioned your eight year old ability to recognize only anarchy and Statism, nothing else exists, you're a simpleton
No shit, moron.
There are anarchists and statists. Maybe you can include Anocrats (Somalia) into the mix.
If there is critical mass of people with a mentality that is intolerant of anarchy, it pretty much destroys the argument for anarchy.
The majority of people are sheep. They herd the status quo.
Dominant anarchism means support from the general public.
You clearly have no interest in persuading people your system is better.
Sure I do.
Not brainwashed tools. It is uneconomic to spend 50 years of my life reconditioning your ignorance.
Anarchism does nothing but instigate violence since it does nothing about it.
Somalia is the reality of anarchy. You have this view of little house on the prairie. The reality is that the absence of government would lead to clans as the weak and ignorant subject themselves to a tribal leader who promises them protection and food for servitude
Anarchists are Statists too since you eliminate your own ability to cooperate to defend yourselves giving no serious opposition to their tyranny, so you're really a Statist too. Everyone is apparently
Obviously there is always going to be a propensity for government to do more than is beneficial. But it is less than clear where that line is. For instance, we push vaccinations pretty hard. I think that has been shown to be beneficial. We also track down people with active pulmonary tuberculosis and make sure they take their antibiotics every single day for months and months. And we do this even with illegal aliens because it helps protect our citizens.Yes, he doesn't take questions because he has no idea how it would work. The reason for that is it wouldn't.
What's right about anarchy is that it recognizes government is the worst solution to any problem.
What's wrong with it is that it doesn't recognize the one time the worst solution is the best solution, when it's the only solution.
There can only be one police force, one military. We need civil and criminal courts to adjudicate disputes between citizens and enforce contracts. There can only be one recognition of property ownership and management of limited resources (e.g., water). And roads can't be built practically on a national basis by individuals.
So, government should do those things, and nothing else. The Founding Fathers got it right
Obviously there is always going to be a propensity for government to do more than is beneficial. But it is less than clear where that line is. For instance, we push vaccinations pretty hard. I think that has been shown to be beneficial. We also track down people with active pulmonary tuberculosis and make sure they take their antibiotics every single day for months and months. And we do this even with illegal aliens because it helps protect our citizens.
Looking at the writings of men who died 200 years ago is hardly going to help us decide the best course of action.
I answered your questions by pointing out the glaring failures of Globalization.Unfettered Free Trade has brought us to where we are.
Oh really?
When have we ever had unfettered free trade even once in US history? It certainly was not before the Great Depression.
But don't worry, Uncle Friedman has taken care of Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.
You only have baseless conjecture on your side.
Last conversation I repeated a series of questions over a dozen times, and you deflected from answering them every single reply.
I answered your questions by pointing out the glaring failures of Globalization.
All you want is a paragraph from an Economist you would disagree with anyway.
When did I say that? I'm not claiming I didn't but I would like to know context. I can't remember it. As to your point. Give me a real workable alternative how we distribute food, justice, health, food and the like without government.Obviously there is always going to be a propensity for government to do more than is beneficial. But it is less than clear where that line is. For instance, we push vaccinations pretty hard. I think that has been shown to be beneficial. We also track down people with active pulmonary tuberculosis and make sure they take their antibiotics every single day for months and months. And we do this even with illegal aliens because it helps protect our citizens.
The state grows overtime. It continues to grow more abusive, corrupt, and inefficient, until the cycle of violence comes full circle.
Then millions die in war, civil resistance, rioting, ect.
Looking at the writings of men who died 200 years ago is hardly going to help us decide the best course of action.
Right, and their writings are going to quickly become irrelevant.
Any brainwashed tool still playing politics is preserving a dying beast, that will slaughter you without consideration the days before it gasps its final breath.
When did I say that? I'm not claiming I didn't but I would like to know context. I can't remember it. As to your point.
Give me a real workable alternative how we distribute food, justice, health, food and the like without government.
