Forums / Public / Law Enforcement & Police / What are your thoughts on anarchy, can you name a positive and a negative effect it would have on society?
| Author | Message |
Gideeup
252 posts |
#118338 2008-05-21 02:49 GMT |
|
|
|
RingKeeper
257 posts |
#118339 2008-05-21 03:04 GMT |
|
first thing I think of with anarchy is no rules, no laws....it would basically mean "survival of the fittest", as well as "mob rules" meaning the one positive effect would be progression of the self interests of the masses. We wouldn't have some dumbass republican president in office, but rather one that embodies the spirit of the average American. The negative effects on society is the opposite of freedom, by not allowing people to vote for said dumbass presidents (even if they think they are doing the right thing) regardless of their inability to relate to logic and self progression. Law equals stable environments, lack of laws would equate to chaos.
|
|
Scorpion
259 posts |
#118340 2008-05-21 06:26 GMT |
|
anarchy is strongly overrated.... basically anyone with any sort of supplies would be robbed and most likely killed trying to defend it, and anyone smaller than your average hells angels member would die off.
soon, the smartest of the people (not the scientists... the mobsters) would take over and re establish "civilization" in their own image. sleezy and violent. eventually the remaining normal folks will get sick of it and revolt, we will enter a dark age. then eventually build back up to a slightly more chaotic version of the current world we know today. with less government and more business it kinda sucks... but its what we are headed for at flank speed. once the lights go out, the taps stop running and the stores are empty... we all panic the only upside to it i think would be that we hit rock bottom and have nowhere left to go but up. who knows, we might even improve a little... or at very least give the planet a chance to recover from our blight |
|
DeadlyAmphibian
265 posts |
#118341 2008-05-21 07:41 GMT |
|
Anarchy is the absence of any type of political authority -- no good president, no bad president -- based on the concept that all governments are oppressive.
In Utopia, perhaps, anarchy would be the ideal system, as there would be no need to delegate duties, citizens would resolve their own problems peacefully, libraries and roads and parks would be freely financed, built and maintained. From what I've read, though, even Heaven operates within a hierarchy. The most positive effect anarchy can have on society, however, is unleashing rapid and massive change in the midst of havoc and chaos. The old regime is destroyed along with the rich and powerful who both maintained and were maintained by the state.Their benefits and privileges are stripped, and wealth and power bleed from the few to nourish the many. Consider the French revolution and the Russian revolution as prime examples of seemingly entrenched power structures destroyed by the desperate poor and an impassioned middle class. Mexico's vast estates remained in the hands of the elite, however, while the majority of citizens were lucky to receive share-cropper status. Cultures change, new ideas can flourish, assets and wealth are parceled out, and meritorious and just people can rise to power. Nature does abhor a vacuum. The power structure will soon be filled, usually by a new boss same as the old boss -- and often not as effective. In the meantime, however, in the midst of anarchy, civil services almost inevitably are neglected and decay -- food rots while people starve, water stagnates along with commerce, crops and industries are ruined, the strong and vicious terrorize the citizenry, and the weak and victimized have no recourse. You can elaborate from there. The upheaval of the existing power structures and social orders is not a rare fantasy, however, for those believe the strongest, smartest and most skillful would thrive in an environment without rules and red tape and corporate bullies maintaining the status quo. That is one reason that doomsday novels and movies can be so stimulating. |
|
PolarBear
245 posts |
#118342 2008-05-21 15:12 GMT |
|
This came using the search function, but I'd never look in this section, nor would most people interested in this topic look in this section.
**** Anarchism, in a nutshell, supports free association, opposes the state, and opposes hierarchy. (At the very least, anarchists oppose involuntary hierarchy; anarchists often try to create egalitarian alternatives to the semi-voluntary hierarchies too). There are several different traditions which respect these values, and usually recognize each other as forms of anarchism. These traditions borrow ideas from classical liberalism, from early socialism, from each other, and sometimes from other sources. People depend on each other. People tend to create their own voluntary social order, including free association, reciprocity, mutual aid, and, if necessary, mutual defense. Once people create this order, a state, or any other criminal gang, is in trouble. So the state, to preserve itself, must preempt voluntary social order. Highleyman, "An introduction to anarchism:" http://www.spunk.org/texts/intro/sp001550.html "An anarchist FAQ:" http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/ or http://www.infoshop.org/faq/index.html (same text) |
|
> 1 <
waxman christopher crime apparel publication administered taker educational caused claim support monarch political professors among t firm craigslist speaker tasks studies college subject applied reasons tutor study properties homes loss rape web disposal associations line reality papers death paralegals inheritance hosts library real medical analysis michigan number equal designs taking driver






