SH3RL0CK Posted May 29, 2009 Share Posted May 29, 2009 ...Anarchy means no ruler. It doesn't mean "no rules". If there are no rules, then that would be "anomie". That is incorrect. I provided the definition of anarchy in post 13, but to repeat it here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy –noun 1. a state of society without government or law. "Law" and "rules" are synonyms; therefore I believe anarchy is the correct usage for meaning "no rules". http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/synonym 1. a word having the same or nearly the same meaning as another in the language, FYI, anomie means the following: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anomie –noun Sociology. a state or condition of individuals or society characterized by a breakdown or absence of social norms and values, as in the case of uprooted people. I really do not understand your point for this thread (using the correct words would certainly help me). Are you advocating anarchy as a superior form of "government"? If so, then you need to address the "warlord" problems in the earlier posts. Are you advocating democracy (which you have used interchangably with anarchy) as a superior form of government? I haven't looked at the links; I am not convinced that I should do so. I am cautious about spyware, spam, viruses, NSFW, etc., and I haven't been given a compelling reason to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improvision Posted May 29, 2009 Author Share Posted May 29, 2009 (edited) That is incorrect. I provided the definition of anarchy in post 13, but to repeat it here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy "Law" and "rules" are synonyms; therefore I believe anarchy is the correct usage for meaning "no rules". http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/synonym FYI, anomie means the following: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anomie I really do not understand your point for this thread (using the correct words would certainly help me). Are you advocating anarchy as a superior form of "government"? If so, then you need to address the "warlord" problems in the earlier posts. Are you advocating democracy (which you have used interchangably with anarchy) as a superior form of government? I haven't looked at the links; I am not convinced that I should do so. I am cautious about spyware, spam, viruses, NSFW, etc., and I haven't been given a compelling reason to do so. You never been to youtube before? The definition of anarchy you provided was written by someone who thinks government needs to be there to make law and assume that lack of government is also lack of law. In anarchy, social norms and values are what make the law. Edited May 29, 2009 by Improvision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 In anarchy, social norms and values are what make the law. Sorry, but anyone with any life experience and forsight should be able to see that this will just result in gang land. Details, such as money, transportation, public services, foreign relations/disputes, etc are not provided. It reminds me of communism - simple ideals that sound good, but result in disaster. I can see where you may want to make that the ideal and strive for smaller government, but to eliminate it all together - well, good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improvision Posted May 30, 2009 Author Share Posted May 30, 2009 Sorry, but anyone with any life experience and forsight should be able to see that this will just result in gang land. Details, such as money, transportation, public services, foreign relations/disputes, etc are not provided. It reminds me of communism - simple ideals that sound good, but result in disaster. I can see where you may want to make that the ideal and strive for smaller government, but to eliminate it all together - well, good luck.Money is a representation of goods. People can make their own money.The paper that the white house uses represents gold, silver, and other things of common value. People could simply use gold, silver, and such as currency. Even salt was currency at one time. Public transportation can be paid for by the public. The public can hire individual people to do public service. The public can decide who can represent them in foreign relations/disputes. That is how it worked in the anarchic nations that survived up to a historically recorded 1000 years. People today have been brainwashed into thinking we need a government/state to decide things for us. We think we need people to do everything for us and that is why our economy is going down hill by people spending money while not producing anything to make money. Most corporations' manufacturing jobs have have been exported to foreign workers, which is eliminating American jobs. Banks and the government are mismanaging tax that it steals from our hard work. We have no say over it. We just sit on our asses and let things go bad for us as politicians are playing golf, kicking back, and sipping whiskey. They know that the people will not dare to take back control of their own lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 They collapsed when they had become less anarchic and/or when they were invaded by armies of foreign non-anarchic states. You pull apart your own case. Why did they become less anarchic? Why were they invaded? Because that's human nature too. I always enjoy these "make it an anarchy" arguments, as if anarchy could be put into place and enforced by law. Kinda defeats the whole purpose, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH3RL0CK Posted June 1, 2009 Share Posted June 1, 2009 (edited) You never been to youtube before? Sure. But it is blocked on my work computer, and at home I usually use my work computer (I vary rarely use my home computer, even at home). Also, your links don't quite look like youtube, having an unusual address...if I really cannot be sure what is there (and you cannot with youtube BTW) I generally avoid the link. No matter, your argument does not seem to be based on the links...it seems to be based upon improper usage of words... In anarchy, social norms and values are what make the law. If you have "law" then you do not have anarchy, by definition. Do I need to provide you a link showing the definition of definition? What you are describing is democracy, where everyone as a group defines the laws. Stop trying to use anarchy where you really should be saying democracy. Edited June 1, 2009 by SH3RL0CK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petebro Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 The rise in anarchistic activity in my opinion is largely due to the thieving politicians and there lacksadaysical approach to preventing social decay. The anarchist latches onto the politicians shirt tail which has been left hanging out and is determined to pull,pull,pull. This was demonstrated on the put people first campaign , governments should represent the views of the electorate and justice should be served if totalaterionism politics have been become dictatorial to the mass populus the anarchists thrive and to some extent are instrumental in tagging onto legitamite concerns so they are a small group who perhaps see violence as the only way of attracting wider coverage . This then can become a dangerous playground for the political process , the devils playground shall we say.The problem lies with a wall that politicians put up around themselves and become insular , and when it starts to be broken down the exposure is too much , far too much . The taking advantage and wide spread abuse of power in politics needs to be stamped out and this may quench the anarchists flames , unfortunately politicians have been dousing the flames with highly flammable material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokele Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 OK, we let this thread slide for various reasons, but normally, political threads are confined to the politics area, for users who have access. As such, this thread is getting close. Petebro will just have to wait to accumulate enough posts to get politics access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts