It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Question Of Anarchy - Have You Got What It Takes To Be Top Dog?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I sit in a white, rusty V.W golf. Its 1:30pm and I'm waiting for my fiancés daughter to finish school. I'm not rich, in fact I have a nest but no eggs. My fiance works in the beauty industry and is popular and busy but we live day to day never able to save any money, it comes in an goes out. I do backyard welding, just started making ornamental plant hanging stands and ornamental centre feature garden gazebos for people with big gardens. I'm going to advertise and sell online. I hope it does well. You see, the problem is that I am an honest man.

If I was conscienceless, remorselessless, guiltless, heartless, aggressive, intimidating, violent, conniving, dishonest and ruthless then I wonder what I could achieve in the name of power and wealth.

I could murder and intimidate and fraud my way to the top and gain untold wealth and power. I could buy happiness and love and sex. I could use designer drugs and who knows I might live to a ripe old age and die surrounded by friends and family.

If heaven does not exist and we all live just for this life then why not ~anarchy should be our belief system and survival of the fittest our reality. The world will be full of savage brutes and gentle honest (if not somewhat poor) folk (like me) would be killed off.

There seems to be this battle today and I as an honest man wonder how I'm still alive because I'm not the kind to do 'what it takes to get ahead'.

I'm not saying all honest people are like me but generally honest people don't kill either.

Why do we protect honesty and faith and integrity and love and oppose violence and brutality? Why do we want to preserve these traits?

If we changed the law of the land to anarchy then at least we would finally have a true reflection of what the human race really is I mean if you're the strongest most brutal savage conniving man\ woman then you're in charge and everyone will know where you came from and how you got there, none of this current politics of wimps and pansies in high office spineless puppet cowards (or are they) do we know their FULL stories?

This world will only change if

1. FULL DISCLOSURE - everyone has to have a public record of every single event in their lives as a public record available on command, so we can really 'see' each other.

Or

2. TOTAL ANARCHY - this way all the weak willed get killed but the strong survive (say good bye to any good character traits and hello to animalism) we will be like animals except even a savage brute can paint or sing.

I'm honest and real and trustworthy and sincere and have integrity. If full disclosure became the law I would gladly reveal my entire life story, warts and all because I believe then, we can all start to work on our problems honestly and fix them using agreed human morality as the standard.

If anarchy becomes the law I will die or become a slave because I'm not strong or savage in any way, I will not kill.

For some reason the law still upholds justice, truth and freedom over survival of the fittest, Justice over anarchy is it some political leaders who make laws know that if true anarchy was the law they would get their butts kicked?

Or is it right and good to uphold these virtuous traits and if so, why? Who says we should uphold Justice? Certainly not God? (Sarcasm)

Anarchy or full disclosure? The fact that we can't decide (as a species) proves we are in a war and by its very nature GOD will win the war (otherwise He's not God) and if there's no God then WHY DOESN'T ANARCHY RULE THIS PLANET?

I would make a good anarchist if I believed there was no God (I think I would but probably I would be killed in not a large amount of time )

If God didn't exist what kind of anarchist would you be, if there was NO law to restrain you?





posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 06:52 AM
link   
As I understand it anarchy is not going hog wild hurting, raping, or stealing from people. In a truly anarchistic environment the people who do that would be the ones eventually killed off. So you, as a principled honest man, would do well in a real anarchistic nation, which is, of course, theoretical and not practical in today's dog-eat-dog-eat-another-dog-reality-television world.
edit on 22-1-2015 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 06:54 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

I have a few friends. Together we form a group that does not include a leader, yet is stable and peaceful. I am confdent that this can be reproduced on a larger scale, sure with a leader but who is a friend to his good people. I think the answer is in a balance between Libertarianism and Authoritarianism... If you stand at either edge of the balance, you'll fall.

I don't know if I have what it takes to be a leader. But people around me think yes, for they know that I am ambitious, yet encourage different opinions. I am not judmental, yet I know right from wrong. I am a pacifist yet I am determined.

Balance is the true secret. Not violence.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 06:56 AM
link   
1. you dont understand true anarchy...
2. humanity is far from ready for true anarchy...



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

When i was a little younger i always used to wish for a state of anarchy to come about. Sort of survival of the fittest situation, sink or swim scenario. I laboured under the illusion that such a situation would separate Humanity's Wheat from the Chaff.

Then i had children and came to the conclusion that an anarchic form of rule would be rather departmental to not only our children's education and health but also there continued existence.

Anarchy is simply a bad idea, romanticized buy the fact that we cannot abide to live under totalitarian rule. Truth is a measure of balance between freedom and control is a requirement for any society to prosper and flourish.
edit on 22-1-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:07 AM
link   
There are societies that have experienced anarchy. Somalia, Yugoslavia and Rhodesia come to mind.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND


If God didn't exist what kind of anarchist would you be, if there was NO law to restrain you?

Internal compass won't allow me to chart that course.


if there's no God then WHY DOESN'T ANARCHY RULE THIS PLANET?

Some peoples lives are ruled by anarchy. They rape, rob and murder their way through life like a non stop train wreck. I just watched a crime show about some people that, once disclosed to the public eye, showed how this "circle of friends" were oblivious to anything but what they wanted, destroying others lives.

Oh well, back to prison… out of prison, oh well back to murder, rape and mayhem.

Uh, that whole disclosure thing? Everyones mind is a 24/7 security cam recording everything done under the sun.

One day, the "books" will be opened…



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Expat888

Change the basic human paradigm to be more conducive regarding empathy and peaceful coexistence and an Anarchic form of for want of a better word rule would be the perfect form of existence.

How to accomplish such a feat however is another kettle of fish altogether.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Expat888
1. you dont understand true anarchy...
2. humanity is far from ready for true anarchy...

No, op does not and is mistaking it for chaos whereas actual anarchy is more equated to harmony, equality, peace, and human achievement that is present without the need for governments. You are correct we are from from it, the greater society of this world is not mature enough, we are but adolescents.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake


How to accomplish such a feat however is another kettle of fish altogether.

It begins in the home at an early age.


"I was _________ in a village and even though I've now worked in the city for many years ... "

I can choose among four possible answers:
A) reared
B) raised
C) nurtured
D) bred.

Raise vs. Rear



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Seems to me we require more than the ability to distinguish right from wrong to bring about a paradigm shift. The "Other peoples point of view gun" from The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy would probably do the trick!


Another possible answer to your multiple-choice question could be "I was conceived in a village".



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: intrptr

Seems to me we require more than the ability to distinguish right from wrong to bring about a paradigm shift. The "Other peoples point of view gun" from The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy would probably do the trick!


Another possible answer to your multiple-choice question could be "I was conceived in a village".

Point of view gun is okay in the right hands. What if a Hitler type got hold of one?

I was born in a village and raised by television. Or the state…



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

The world is an anarchy. There are no universal rules that tell us how to form a government, we did that ourselves. When humans first walked the earth(be it God or science) it was anarchy and it is still anarchy today, we just created nice little governments around the world to guard us from the full effect of the anarchy.

So if the world "changed" to anarchy, what would happen? Nice little governments would form again...
edit on 1/22/2015 by PsychoEmperor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Think a better variation with more of an area of effect, more like a Howitzer instead of a gun. Essentially everyone has to be be able to appreciate everyone else's point of view. If Adolf Hitler could have been made to feel or experience the feelings he was responsible for associated with the genocide, pain and misery that the Holocaust brought about do you really think things would have played out the same way?
edit on 22-1-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

If heaven does not exist and we all live just for this life then why not ~anarchy should be our belief system and survival of the fittest our reality. The world will be full of savage brutes and gentle honest (if not somewhat poor) folk (like me) would be killed off.



One doesn't have to believe in heaven to be an honest or a good person.
edit on 22amThu, 22 Jan 2015 08:20:20 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake


If Adolf Hitler could have been made to feel or experience the feelings associated regrading the genocide that the Holocaust brought about do you really think things would have played out the same way?

If he thought differently WWII wouldn't have happened. Hitler enjoyed the harm he caused others. His point of view was given to him by his father who beat him regularly…

Hitlers dysfuncttional family



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

If we all thought differently WWII may not have happened. Can't blame one Man for the actions that transpired throughout said conflict. However evil or misguided he may have been. They do say follow the money so in that regard I blame the bankers. Considering they are the ones responsible for financing the whole situation.
edit on 22-1-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

Seek power, not authority.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Expat888

Considering what they did with Communism it would only be a "MAD MAX" scenario.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

Please do yourself a favor and at least know what you are talking about. This thread by Wrabbit2000 would be a good place to start. I don't say this to ridicule or scorn but because you truly don't seem (along with MANY others) to know what anarchy actually is about, which isn't chaos and violence as "The Higher-ups" would have us believe.


Anarchy refers to a society without a publicly enforced government. [1] Since its inception in the original ancient Greek, anarchy has been used in the negative sense to imply political disorder or lawlessness within a society. In 1840, however, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon adopted the term in his treatise What Is Property? to refer to a new political philosophy, anarchism, which advocates stateless societies based on voluntary associations.


Anarchy Wiki

Disillusions of Anarchy: The Common Perception of Anarchy in Modern Day Society

Tyranny of One, Tyranny of All, Anarchy — An Abused Concept

Here's a few to get you started. Hopefully you will come to realize what anarchy actually is.




new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join