It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why can't all nations be ran with anarchy?

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:37 PM
I don't understand why anarchy doesn't work.

I would love to see all nations give up on their government and to try to make everyone closer in a community-like setting.

Rather than having a government govern and control everyone people would build communities and they would rule and it would be truly be rule by the people.

Why doesn't anarchy work?

I think anarchy would be better than the current forms of government that nations have today.

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:46 PM
I agree so far, but have an open mind to any possible mistakes that have been overlooked in forming an anarchic(?) society.

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:46 PM
i agree with you, i would love to see all of the worlds economies collapse and all governments to fall apart to the point where no one needs them anymore, i think it could be possible but there are always those people who say "people are too crazy and it would never work"

i dont care, i would love to see everything collapse and anarchy to provail

i dont want anyone to die though

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:50 PM
It would only work among a people who can respect each others free will. It would be a Utopia of sorts, but it is not feasible in a world with "evil".

The founding fathers saw government as a necessary evil. But still evil. And as such, they created a very limited government. One that was supposed to only protect it's citizens, and provide a common defense. It was to be the least amount of government as possible. Of course that's not even close to what we have today.

So basically, unless the world is a bunch of people who are Jesus like(not just christian), can live and let live you can't have anarchy. Soon as 1 person believes they have the right and power to control another, it's lost.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by badmedia]

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 12:00 AM
I agree with the above post. As long as there are one person who thinks he has all the answers, then all is lost. Many people are too easy to follow the leaders wherever they go.

I am an anarchist at heart and I am sure it's true for many others, but at the present moment (actually any time in history) we got to have some kind of control. How can we trust fellow people? How can we trust neighboring tribes or communities? There will be some levels of paranoia.

I would love for anarchy to happen, but at this moment it just will not happen.

A lot of information on wiki: Anarchism

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 12:05 AM
Just look at families. There is not supposed to be a governmental type structure in families I don't believe, and yet there is usually to the benefit of the parents and detriment to the children. The abuse of this family type of governing is called child abuse. Although it is not always the same scenario it is the same principle. In real governments they have no family ties that protect you. There is no love to save you. It is slavery. And the only way it could be any different was if, like Badmedia said, no one ever wished to have control over another. Which is highly unlikely to happen any time soon.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by cancerian42]

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 02:16 AM
Here's one reason I'm not convinced on Anarchy.

The current gangs, the remnants of the collapsed military, and other organizations will run riot, and basically turn it into a tyranny situation. You may be happy in your little world growing your own food, living a nice life not being hassled by the government, until one of these groups finds out about you, and comes and takes all your food and land.

Now you could argue that you will have your guns to defend yourself, but you and your gun will be no match against an out of work group of corrupt ex-cops with all their numbers, armor, and better weapons.

You may be able to get around this a little, by forming with your neighbours to form your own defensive gang, but not everyone will have this opportunity, and there will always be a more powerful gang out there.

It would be like a civil war but with thousands or millions of sides.

Anarchy kind of sounds nice in a way, but to me it has too many flaws like this. Some organized systems like university's and health services work better when everyone works together. Progress in many areas will be stifled otherwise.

Maybe someday in the future, if humans evolve to a better type of animal, it will be possible in someway, but for now the flawed democracy idea is the best we have.

new topics

top topics


log in