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.

 

Those Pesky Anarchists

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
i think that anarchy could work, but i think it must follow a capitalist type of society. for example if america collapsed and there was no police force or government or military i think people could live a lot better. not immediately afterwards when there are riots and violence and that sort of thing. but after that initial wave dies down, the population is reduced, and i would assume groups of people are banding together in small towns or families on the land they owned before the collapse. this is when natural selection would resume, only in this type of survival of the fittest world. i think a lot of us would adapt and thrive in this type of environment. people who could never be a success in todays rat race could have a very high advantage. maybe this is the only way we can actually evolve since modern medicine and food have basically eliminated natural selection? who knows, these could just be and likely are ramblings of a crazy person.




posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Without rulers you cannot have rules.

You need rulers to make and enforce the rules.

The only way around that is a public referendum on the rules where all people are able to participate without any interference of a public official. The orders would be given to the police and they would enforce those rules.

Other than that we would only have moral rules.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Without rulers you cannot have rules.

You need rulers to make and enforce the rules.

The only way around that is a public referendum on the rules where all people are able to participate without any interference of a public official. The orders would be given to the police and they would enforce those rules.

Other than that we would only have moral rules.


I can make a rule that forbids public urination on my property.

I do not need political power to make this rule, simply a gun and my property rights will suffice.

Thus, you can have rules without rulers.

Private restaurants and clubs make all sorts of rules without political power. Such as shirts required. They have private security guards to make sure those rules are enforced.



[edit on 3-8-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


And your neighbor can have a rule that allows him to enter your house, shoot you in the head, rape your wife and take all your belongings.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


And your neighbor can have a rule that allows him to enter your house, shoot you in the head, rape your wife and take all your belongings.


No, you can't.

First off, not only do I have gun, but my friends and family also have guns. Thus, even if he manages to kill me, he's sure to face reprisals.

Second off, he necessarily must violate my property rights to kill me. Therefore the rest of society will see him as being wrong. Therefore he will face reprisal not only from my friends and family, but from the rest of society in general.

People understand naturally that they have a right to protect what is theirs. They do not need to be taught this in a law school. People understand naturally that needlessly killing others is wrong. This is natural law.



[edit on 3-8-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Well lets just hope you have more friends than he does.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Well lets just hope you have more friends than he does.


Government can't protect me from a homicidal neighbor. Only I can protect myself from a homicidal neighbor.

All the laws in the world will not stop someone from killing me if that is their goal.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


But at least currently people are hold back from committing crimes because of a high change of being caught and punished. When there are no authorities there won't be a criminal investigation. Or your friends will have to pay for it at a private company. And if the felon is part of a large group they will be immune for any kind of prosecution.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


But at least currently people are hold back from committing crimes because of a high change of being caught and punished. When there are no authorities there won't be a criminal investigation. Or your friends will have to pay for it at a private company. And if the felon is part of a large group they will be immune for any kind of prosecution.


People do not hold back committing crimes because of laws.

In case you missed the memo, a third of black males are under some form of government supervision.

Laws do not prevent crime.

If there were no authorities, people would take that money they currently fork over to the ineffective police departments and hire private investigators. Those investigators are a hell of a lot better than police because they are motivated to get paid. If they don't preform, they go out of business.

The only time a police department goes out of business is when the looters have sucked the local tax base dry.




[edit on 3-8-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Reply to post by -PLB-
 


No law has ever prevented any attack, rape, theft, murder or even drunken pissing on a sidewalk. At best the law is simply a vehicle for punishment after the fact.

What's so hard to understand? That's the reality of it. Even the SCOTUS has ruled taking into account the law prevents no crime that cops have absolutely no responsibility to keep any of us safe from harm. Because they just can't. It's not possible.

The sooner we all accept the reality of this the sooner we can get on with living like human beings and not like share cropping drones.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by -PLB-
 


No law has ever prevented any attack, rape, theft, murder or even drunken pissing on a sidewalk. At best the law is simply a vehicle for punishment after the fact.

What's so hard to understand? That's the reality of it. Even the SCOTUS has ruled taking into account the law prevents no crime that cops have absolutely no responsibility to keep any of us safe from harm. Because they just can't. It's not possible.

The sooner we all accept the reality of this the sooner we can get on with living like human beings and not like share cropping drones.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Praise Mao.

But what if I like living as a share cropping drone?

Sir, I'm too scared to be responsible for myself and my own safety.

I need a powerful armed nanny to run my life and keep me safe.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
People do hold back from committing crimes because of enforcement of laws. Its just silly to think otherwise, then you have absolutely no clue about human behavior, nor and life experience. When you want PI's to solve all criminal cases it would mean there is only justice for the rich.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
People do hold back from committing crimes because of enforcement of laws. Its just silly to think otherwise, then you have absolutely no clue about human behavior, nor and life experience. When you want PI's to solve all criminal cases it would mean there is only justice for the rich.


To think that laws prevent crime is silly.

We have 1 out of 31 adults on State supervision.

Laws create crime, they don't prevent it.


en.wikipedia.org...

According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS): "In 2008, over 7.3 million people were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole at year-end — 3.2% of all U.S. adult residents or 1 in every 31 adults."[6]


More laws will not reduce crime.



[edit on 3-8-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
People do hold back from committing crimes because of enforcement of laws. Its just silly to think otherwise, then you have absolutely no clue about human behavior, nor and life experience.


Why would somebody commit murder?

Insanity?
Heat of the moment rage?
Because he's a sadistic nut who plotted and planned and expects to get away with it?

Which of these motivations can a law against prevent?

If you can honestly tell me that you or somebody you know, should murder suddenly be legalized overnight, would run out and kill another human being for some motivation other than insanity, heat of the moment rage or because you're so sick you planned and plotted a hunt then you need to remove yourself from this society.

Imagine all law erased and all law enforcement disappears. Would you now run amok raping a pillaging? Would you? The risk of some time in prison is the only thing preventing you from violating another human being? Seriously?



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Of course laws create crime, without laws, nothing would be a crime. If you legalize drugs, there will no longer be drug related crimes.

For the rest, I am not sure what you are trying to say. Of course law enforcement won't stop all crimes, but denying it will prevent any crime at all is silly. Just look for example at a countries such as Singapore or Saoudi Arabie. Those have some of the most strict law enforcements in the world, and are also among the lowest crime rates in the world. Not saying I agree with the strict enforcement in such countries, but it does show a clear correlation. If you look at countries where there is no enforcement at all, you will find very high crime rates. I know of no example that shows otherwise.

As for a system that works with privatized police force, look for example at South Africa. There the police lost all control, and if you want to be protected you need to buy it. Now take a look at the crime rate of that country.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


"The risk of some time in prison is the only thing preventing you from violating another human being? Seriously? "

For him, that just might be the case.

Psychologists call this "projection."

en.wikipedia.org...

"Psychological projection or projection bias (including Freudian Projection) is the unconscious act of denial of a person's own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, such as to the weather, a tool, or to other people. Thus, it involves imagining or projecting that others have those feelings."


I have a theory that democrats demand massive amounts of laws because they are inherently evil people.

They demand massive amounts of welfare because they are inherently stingy people.

If a person is very charitable, they see little need for welfare.

If a person is generally decent, they see little need for laws.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I'm going to have to agree here outside of common law, these laws are all passed to suck resources and maintain control through fear.

Your projection analogy is right other than the obvious political bias.

I tend to think our leaders are the most criminal contol freak psychopaths among us thus their aspirations for power.

Good people will live their lives accordingly regardless of laws. Evil people will commit crimes against others regardless of laws.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


Your example of Singapore supports the worthlessness of our "Western" system.

Singapore is pretty much an all or nothing situation. You get caught peddling heroine they kill you. No recidivism there. You get caught peddling heroine here you get to spend a couple of years hanging out with buddies and networking then when released you go right back to peddling heroine but this time with a larger network.

Unless the US is willing to take a Singapore-esque hard-as-hell line on crime the US may as well stop pretending altogether. Our system is a bastard child that harms the innocent, protects the guilty and wastes resources all day long.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Just claiming out of the blue that law enforcement only works when the system is "hard-as-hell" is as shortsighted as claiming it doesn't work at all. There is a whole world of color in between your black and white world.

[edit on 3-8-2010 by -PLB-]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Just claiming out of the blue that law enforcement only works when the system is "hard-as-hell" is as shortsighted as claiming it doesn't work at all. There is a whole world of color in between your black and white world.

[edit on 3-8-2010 by -PLB-]


Not really.

And even Singapore still has some problems.

I'd much rather live where I'm allowed to do whatever I want, as long as whatever it is I'm doing is not harming someone else or damaging their property.

We don't need a stack of laws twenty volumes thick to accomplish this. I'd say a pamphlet I can stick in my pocket should be about the correct size.

Don't harm others.

Don't steal from others.

Don't damage other people's property.

That's about the extent of the laws we need.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join