ANARCHY!!!

[Jon]

What do you think would happen if the constitution was gone and massive anarchy arose?

How long do you think it would take for american to go "bye-bye"?

[Jim]

A state of anarchy would eventually bring about a new form of government. It can't last.

[Deacon]

Yes, usually a person with strong followers will take gov't most likely making a dictatorship

[Nitrus]

And they will try to take over the world, WW3 will happen, and eventually we will destroy the human race with nukes.

Or what he said about, new goverment. :)

[radu_dragonul]

Anarchy is an Utopia. Many philosophers and politicians create theories about anarchy but none of these theories became practice. Anarchy is somewhat related to socialism but most times socialism became communism, all the theory disappeared and instead, as NavyPilot21 said, a dictatorship was made.

[Huron]

A state of anarchy its utopic and impossible.
At least this is my point of view. We need to have certain rules... and even anarchy has their rules.

[T.J. Wolfe]

I believe there's a 99.9% chance that Anarchy wouldn't work, but it would be amazing if it did.

[Labrocca]

I believe Hell is all about Anarchy. Anarchy itself is such an odd word.

http://www.answers.com/anarchy&r=67

I am not sure anarchy has ever truely existed anywhere.

[T.J. Wolfe]

I'm pretty sure it has existed a very long time ago, possibly the caveman ages.

[Old Corps Gunny]

Anarchy is the refusal to recognize authority (i.e., rules). Probably the closest anyone got to anarchy were the mountain men, but they were loners for the most part, trapping animals for fur and going to the annual "rendezvous" to trade the furs for supplies, booze, trade yarns, get drunk, fight, then head back to the mountains for another year of solitude. As soon as enough people get together to form a social group, be it a gang, commune or whatever, rules will naturally evolve and those who refuse to abide by them will either be shunned, banished or punished.

[Athena]

There two ways to have social order, culture or authority over the people. When the US had liberal education, it was relying on culture for social order. Since replacing liberal education with education for technology, it has returned to authority over the people, and I fear liberty in the US is doomed. Interesting there is more talk about anarchy than the US being the autocratic police state it defended itself against in two world wars. I suppose we aren't suppose to notice that we have become what we fought against, and are instead to think anarchy is the worst that can happen?

[Athena]

Do we all know what we are talking about here?

In the past, rulers had little power over the people, because they just didn't have the bureaucracy nor the resources to police people, that modern bureaucracies have. What controlled the people was religion. This could be the beliefs of a primitive tribe, or the early civilizations of Sumer, Babylon, Egypt, all the way to the 20 century when science finally became part of mass public education. People who can be controlled by such a strong cultural influence, can be very controlled people without a government policing them.

What exactly is anarchy? Without some kind of belief system for social control, there must be strong government control. When you speak of anarchy, do you mean with or without cultural control, such as religion, or education for good citizenship?

[Mayberry]

I suppose we aren't suppose to notice that we have become what we fought against Do we all know what we are talking about here? For once Athena, I do know what you are talking about. There is entirely too much governmental control. We are what we fought against, but the fight I am alluding to is the Revolutionary War. You know, the one where the colonists rebelled against British control and excessive taxation. Now does my stand against government handouts make a little more sense?

[Athena]

I suppose we aren't suppose to notice that we have become what we fought against Do we all know what we are talking about here? For once Athena, I do know what you are talking about. There is entirely too much governmental control. We are what we fought against, but the fight I am alluding to is the Revolutionary War. You know, the one where the colonists rebelled against British control and excessive taxation. Now does my stand against government handouts make a little more sense?



:) Now it looks like we are having a friendly game of tennis. I am far more concerned about being like our WWII enemy than our Revolutionary enemy, but they all share something in common. Taxing the people to pay for the wars that are started by men with exagerated egos.

I like the line in the Declaration of Independence that says "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." I think that time has come, and Tocqueville predicted this in surprising detail when he wrote "Democracy in America" in the 1830's. I think we should give some attention to Tocqueville. Any chance of anyone else getting a copy of his book, or googling him? We could have some really great discussions!

Although I think a Revolution is in order, I think this needs to be an intellectual revolution as the first American revolution began as an intellectual revolution. Without the literacracy to establish a functioning democracy, I think a revolution now would only destroy the US and I don't think it would recover from that destruction.

[Mayberry]

Although I think a Revolution is in order, I think this needs to be an intellectual revolution as the first American revolution began as an intellectual revolution. Good luck. There are too many people making lots of money who have too much at stake. They don't want anything to change, and they've got the politicians in their back pocket. It will unfortunately take a catastrophic event of some sort before any meaningful change will happen in this country. Perhaps a full blown World War III, another oil embargo, massive natural catastrophy, something along those lines. Pretty sad.

[Athena]

Although I think a Revolution is in order, I think this needs to be an intellectual revolution as the first American revolution began as an intellectual revolution. Good luck. There are too many people making lots of money who have too much at stake. They don't want anything to change, and they've got the politicians in their back pocket. It will unfortunately take a catastrophic event of some sort before any meaningful change will happen in this country. Perhaps a full blown World War III, another oil embargo, massive natural catastrophy, something along those lines. Pretty sad.


Well, you may be right, but I will continue to my campaign to increase awareness of the Greek and Roman classics, with the hope that a some will realize the importance of this education and go to there school boards and insist on including this education. Preferably we return to liberal education. I think if just one large city did this and significantly decreased social problems and increased economic health, the idea would catch on spread.

I am considering supporting a past mayor's efforts to run for a seat in the senate, on the condition he takes what I am seriously enough to act on it. I had a meeting with him and his grandson and his grandson was able to verify and support what I am saying because of his recent education for the teaching profession.

Any way my goal gives my life a since of purpose, that is better than trying to avoid reality because it is so bad. Like working to endugle my pultry pleasures, just doesn't cut it for me. I rather work to manifest the dream of democracy that began in the US.

[krazikow_50]

Anarchy in America would be the downfall of the human race.

[firefox]

Why? Government force has worked so well for the last 6-8 thousand years right? 8-)

[crimzonsol]

How many of you are Anarchists? if not then do not talk about what you do not know. read my post on anarchist society.

[Pookie]

Back to the original question, that's kind of silly because it wouldn't happen, so why do we need to worry about it?
Purrs,

[firefox]

You're such a party pooper, Pookie! :( In my view, "anarchy" usually refers to the original anti-state socialists of the turn of the last century. Personally, I support order, though not in the form of the state. Instead, mankind could better be served by a more market oriented, choice centric governance model in which individuals are protected from various problems by voluntary for-profit or non-profit organizations. I subscribe to what is basically "anarcho-capitalism" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism), or voluntaryism. These two terms denote effectively the same thing, but the former emphasizes the market/economics aspect, while the later emphasizes the moral and social justice aspects. That page provides a lot of interrelated info on this topic in general, so it would be good to check out.