POLL: Individual Freedom is the foundation of a successful civil society.

[Oddball]

View attachment 248038

While it is true that some anarchist are peaceful people, some are not.

Anarchy is a absence of any rules or regulations. Thus one has to rely on the nature of each individual to co-exist peacefully.

But if one anarchist decides he wants the land and belongings of another one, there is nothing about anarchy that would keep him from taking it.

Anarchy is absence of The State, not rules.

anarchy is absence of authority, without authority rules are just suggestions.

Authority can be derived through voluntary associations....Your model is of, by, and for proactive aggressive force....The kind of force that harms and kills people.

My "model" is based off of human nature and reality. your model is based off of fiction and wishful thinking.

Um, no....

 

[Oddball]

Not warlords, just the biggest strongest, and/or largest groups without scruples.

Sorry, but again, anarchism and communism can only work with robots programmed for the parameters needed for success. Real people mess up the equations.

We have that right now.

 

[Moonglow]

Humans can never really be free, even if they were the only humans alive that freedom would be impaired by the law of nature.

 

[martybegan]

Not warlords, just the biggest strongest, and/or largest groups without scruples.

Sorry, but again, anarchism and communism can only work with robots programmed for the parameters needed for success. Real people mess up the equations.

We have that right now.

Both of the other choices would be worse.

 

[Oddball]

Not warlords, just the biggest strongest, and/or largest groups without scruples.

Sorry, but again, anarchism and communism can only work with robots programmed for the parameters needed for success. Real people mess up the equations.

We have that right now.

Both of the other choices would be worse.

You have examples of how communism is horrific, none of how an anarchist society would operate.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Humans can never really be free, even if they were the only humans alive that freedom would be impaired by the law of nature.

What the FUCK?

So, we should go ahead and surrender all liberty, because we can never be truly free? Is that your point?
.

 

[Moonglow]

Humans can never really be free, even if they were the only humans alive that freedom would be impaired by the law of nature.

What the FUCK?

So, we should go ahead and surrender all liberty, because we can never be truly free? Is that your point?
.

What liberty?

 

[Oddball]

Humans can never really be free, even if they were the only humans alive that freedom would be impaired by the law of nature.

What the FUCK?

So, we should go ahead and surrender all liberty, because we can never be truly free? Is that your point?
.

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

 

[martybegan]

Not warlords, just the biggest strongest, and/or largest groups without scruples.

Sorry, but again, anarchism and communism can only work with robots programmed for the parameters needed for success. Real people mess up the equations.

We have that right now.

Both of the other choices would be worse.

You have examples of how communism is horrific, none of how an anarchist society would operate.

Communism as applied, not as theorized. The only anarchy we have seen is from breakdown of government, that is true, but it is easy to see how it would evolve unless you had the above mentioned robots trying to implement it.

 

[Oddball]

Communism as applied, not as theorized. The only anarchy we have seen is from breakdown of government, that is true, but it is easy to see how it would evolve unless you had the above mentioned robots trying to implement it.

It's only easy to project your surmises about how it would unfold, but where are your examples?

 

[martybegan]

Communism as applied, not as theorized. The only anarchy we have seen is from breakdown of government, that is true, but it is easy to see how it would evolve unless you had the above mentioned robots trying to implement it.

It's only easy to project your surmises about how it would unfold, but where are your examples?

Why is the burden on me to prove it would not work?

Sorry, but based on my observation of human nature, any attempt at it would end up with a bunch of warring fiefdoms.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Why is the burden on me to prove it would not work?

Sorry, but based on my observation of human nature, any attempt at it would end up with a bunch of warring fiefdoms.

To be fair, it is impossible to prove that it will work if there is no opportunity to put it into practice.

Thus, the burden of proof that it would NOT work would fall on those trying to prevent the opportunity.

But I agree partly on the human nature aspect. I don't believe Anarchy can last, because humans are naturally greedy, spiteful, lazy, violent shits. The moment human nature rears it's ugly head, the state is formed.

.

 

[martybegan]

Why is the burden on me to prove it would not work?

Sorry, but based on my observation of human nature, any attempt at it would end up with a bunch of warring fiefdoms.

To be fair, it is impossible to prove that it will work if there is no opportunity to put it into practice.

Thus, the burden of proof that it would NOT work would fall on those trying to prevent the opportunity.

But I agree partly on the human nature aspect. I don't believe Anarchy can last, because humans are naturally greedy, spiteful, lazy, violent shits. The moment human nature rears it's ugly head, the state is formed.

.

Saying "it won't work" isn't preventing the opportunity. Reality is preventing the opportunity. Such a radical change in governing structure (and I said governING, not governMENT) would require the breakdown of the previous system, and the building of the new one by my above mentioned robots.

 

[Oddball]

Communism as applied, not as theorized. The only anarchy we have seen is from breakdown of government, that is true, but it is easy to see how it would evolve unless you had the above mentioned robots trying to implement it.

It's only easy to project your surmises about how it would unfold, but where are your examples?

Why is the burden on me to prove it would not work?

Sorry, but based on my observation of human nature, any attempt at it would end up with a bunch of warring fiefdoms.

Because we know what you're in favor of -The State- doesn't work.

 

[Oddball]

To be fair, it is impossible to prove that it will work if there is no opportunity to put it into practice.

Thus, the burden of proof that it would NOT work would fall on those trying to prevent the opportunity.

But I agree partly on the human nature aspect. I don't believe Anarchy can last, because humans are naturally greedy, spiteful, lazy, violent shits. The moment human nature rears it's ugly head, the state is formed.

.

And there's the contradiction....People are greedy, spiteful, lazy and violent shits, therefore we need to create a monopoly on the use of proactive aggressive force (i.e. The State), populated by the same greedy, spiteful, lazy and violent shits, to make sure the rest of us aren't greedy, spiteful, lazy and violent shits.

Yeah, I'll take nothing at all, thankyouverymuch.

 

[Moonglow]

View attachment 248038

Anarchy and Communism suffer the same problem as they ignore the existence of assholes.

With anarchy its assholes with more power than you locally (bigger gun, more of them), with communism is assholes with more power than you in charge of things.

And in capitalism we are mere slaves of the monied masters..

Hyperbole, nothing but. Sorry but Bill Gates can't come over to my house and make me wax his car for free.

Just try working for a company and speaking yer mind on Facebook..​

At will employment works both ways, and in slavery the whole problem is NOT being able to leave.

untrue with indentured servants.

 

[Oddball]

 

[martybegan]

Communism as applied, not as theorized. The only anarchy we have seen is from breakdown of government, that is true, but it is easy to see how it would evolve unless you had the above mentioned robots trying to implement it.

It's only easy to project your surmises about how it would unfold, but where are your examples?

Why is the burden on me to prove it would not work?

Sorry, but based on my observation of human nature, any attempt at it would end up with a bunch of warring fiefdoms.

Because we know what you're in favor of -The State- doesn't work.

A limited State, as governed by the US Constitution (as written, not as currently followed) is to me the best compromise between individual freedom and maintenance of order.

As I have told other posters, I am an Engineer, and by training and nature realize we live in the real world, not the theoretical worlds of Marx or whoever is the "brainchild" of the Anarchism you propose.

 

[martybegan]

Anarchy and Communism suffer the same problem as they ignore the existence of assholes.

With anarchy its assholes with more power than you locally (bigger gun, more of them), with communism is assholes with more power than you in charge of things.

And in capitalism we are mere slaves of the monied masters..

Hyperbole, nothing but. Sorry but Bill Gates can't come over to my house and make me wax his car for free.

Just try working for a company and speaking yer mind on Facebook..​

At will employment works both ways, and in slavery the whole problem is NOT being able to leave.

untrue with indentured servants.

Actually in the time frame of indenturedness, yes true.

All Indentured servitude boils down to is slavery with a time limit.

 

[Oddball]

[


A limited State, as governed by the US Constitution (as written, not as currently followed) is to me the best compromise between individual freedom and maintenance of order.

As I have told other posters, I am an Engineer, and by training and nature realize we live in the real world, not the theoretical worlds of Marx or whoever is the "brainchild" of the Anarchism you propose.

The State has shown time and again that it will never ever remain limited....Hell, America didn't even make it past two presidents before they started exceeding their authority.

I'm done.