Are You an Anarchist?

[Hate_Prime]

That would be constradictory

If someone is fucking around with you and yours, will you just bend over and let it happen?

[Thudpucker]

No, he doesn't.

I do, but I refuse to conform to your ideals and rules of how a discussion should unfold!

[Thudpucker]

I do now.

[Ray G.]

No. We need a government, but there should be strong checks on that government, especially when it comes to regulating private conduct.

[Masculine Todd]

If someone is fucking around with you and yours, will you just bend over and let it happen?

What if I couldn't stop them? What if I wasn't armed enough, strong enough, powerful enough, strategic enough?

We need some sort of authority, and with authority their must be a leader or group of leaders to inforce authority. To ensure safety and civil rights.

[Hate_Prime]

I do now.

Yeah google showed me pictures of what I thought was a tuba.

I used to throw gum in those things when I as in gradeschool.

[Hate_Prime]

What if I couldn't stop them? What if I wasn't armed enough, strong enough, powerful enough, strategic enough?

We need some sort of authority, and with authority their must be a leader or group of leaders to inforce authority. To ensure safety and civil rights.

Nothing is sure and no police force is perfect in crime prevention. Even a very proactive police force which opens up a whole 'nother issue (which would relate to this thread's topic but not to what we're talking about).

In any case, there are barriers. Some are better at holding their own than others, sure, but that's not the point. It's very survival of the fittest in anarchism.

[Masculine Todd]

Nothing is sure and no police force is perfect in crime prevention. Even a very proactive police force which opens up a whole 'nother issue (which would relate to this thread's topic but not to what we're talking about).

In any case, there are barriers. Some are better at holding their own than others, sure, but that's not the point. It's very survival of the fittest in anarchism.

Thats exactly it: "survival of the fittest", but by fittest, it doesn't particularly mean fittest as in "best of character" or "smartest" or "most innovative". It doesn't truly measure "fittest" by character, but by physical prowess or the most deviant when it comes to protecting themselves. Survival of the fittest is one of the most disgusting methods of thinking. It disregards all compassion, love, and sympathy for you fellow man.

And you are right, police do not stop every crime, the military cannot protect us from every threat, but without them around to ensure tranquility, there would be much more pain, suffering, and chaos. If there were nothing to keep the peace, and all of us who didn't have the financial or physical resources to protect ourselves would be subject to the depraved.

Also, you may argue that it doesn't take a government to keep barriers, to protect. A group of people could come together to keep down violence against people, but that would make them, ultimately, leaders, authority figures, a collective of power.

The only way to have "barriers" is to have authority. Authority can only be implemented and enforced by leaders, authority figures, militia. Anarchy just cannot work.

[Foolish Mortal]

Nothing is sure and no police force is perfect in crime prevention. Even a very proactive police force which opens up a whole 'nother issue (which would relate to this thread's topic but not to what we're talking about).

In any case, there are barriers. Some are better at holding their own than others, sure, but that's not the point. It's very survival of the fittest in anarchism.

Which is why a constant state of anarchy would not work. You cannot maintain civilization in chaos.

[Masculine Todd]

Which is why a constant state of anarchy would not work. You cannot maintain civilization in chaos.

Thank you.