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.

 

Are Governments Necessary?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Really are they necessary or are communities capable of self goverance? Should it be a human right to shun government control in favour of a self sustaining life? I think it is and I actually thing it would improve the quality of life for all. I think Goverance is just a big conspiracy to give the very few all of the power. We should be in control of our own destinies and even if you argue that by voting you are choosing, well really are you? Governments ALWAYS lie to get elected.




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Is it necessary to use violence to force or coerce a person into giving up their property to you so you can buy more guns, build more jails and hire more jailers?

Governments ride in on the same lies and folly that all tyrants ride in on. Don't worry, they say. We'll protect you, they say. The world is scary and bad stuff happens but give me your money and your faith and I'll keep you safe.

Only children and fools ever buy that line but then the vast majority of the people on this Earth are children and fools.

Those of us who are not have to live with guns pressed to our heads and the fingers of a fool on the trigger.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Absolutely not necessary, in the plural that is.

GovernmentS are the problem... We need a new one world order, one government for all people, no states, nations or borders, no military anywhere... Just a minimal global government with minimum laws and enforcement, let the people of the world rule the whole world as they see fit.

Peace and dramatic advancement of the human race would follow... Ah, but that will never happen... So we are doomed to destroy our world and ourselves along with it eventually.




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Yes, governments are necessary... for the time being. I think it is very obvious that man is incapable of proper government at his present stage of development. Mankind was allotted 6,000 years to try the government experiment. That time is almost up. I think most people would agree we have failed miserably.

Even with the level of government (control) we have now, we are still heading for anarchy and self destruction.

The only difference between this present civilisation and past savagery is we have the technology to be more efficient thieves and killers, and political correctness and propaganda to lie to ourselves about it.

How can men govern other men when they cannot govern themselves... Impossible


Why has man failed to govern himself ? Well not because there is anything missing in his makeup. It's because he has turned away from the very thing in his makeup that would empower him to that very goal. His spiritual essence, and the knowledge, wisdom and direction that would come from embrassing it.

See my signature



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Of course not.
How tribes doesn't have a governments?
They only have a chief.
And it's working on for them.

I think we would be better if we don't have governments,only chief.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 



Originally posted by michael1983l
Really are they necessary or are communities capable of self governance?


Do you need a government or do you form a government? You answered your own question.




reply to post by Nikola014
 



Originally posted by Nikola014
How tribes doesn't have a governments?
They only have a chief.


The Chief is the government, call it a dictator with feeling for his subjects.





posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Governments are always necessary. Eventually even libertarianism won't work, philosophically or in practice, because it leads to anarchism (which is fundamentally detrimental to society, not to mention unsustainable). Now, one could argue that the size and scope of government should be limited (and I tend to agree) but humans cannot function without some semblance of governmental structure.

In the United States the Federal government tends to be a convoluted system of bureaucratic red tape that interferes with States rights. I've always thought that a reversion to sovereign states in a loose union would correct the complications with the current duality of state/federal government.

But, really, in any system of society there will be government (whether it be a tribal band, state, or entire country). It's human nature to crave order and a natural hierarchy will prevail in any system.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
yes governments are need if you want to advance a society. it is more of a question if you want to be governed by fear or love.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by relpobre000

... but humans cannot function without some semblance of governmental structure.


Where did this come from?

You're telling me a farmer in the middle of Podunk Wyoming cannot feed himself, clothe himself and shelter himself without a government?

Human beings didnt evolve under a government. It's not like nobody ever existed perfectly well without one or exists currently perfectly well without one.

Define the "function" I could not perform without a governments gun to my head.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Actually humans DID evolve under a government. Anthropology teaches us that we humans are a social and tribal species. Sure, you can sustain yourself if you live in the middle of nowhere but why do you think towns exist? For protection and security.

Even small time farmers form co-ops within communities to feed and clothe themselves. My argument is that socialism (on an incredibly small scale) would be preferable to large government. It CAN work when small communities get together and share. It's the size of the government that is the problem.

But saying that everyone in the world can sustain themselves without a government is immature idealism. Governments WILL form as a matter of necessity.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by relpobre000
But saying that everyone in the world can sustain themselves without a government is immature idealism.


Then it's a good thing I never said that, isnt it?

Have a government. Have any government you want. It doesnt bother me the slightest what other people do to/with their lives.

Just dont wrap me up into it. Dont use the moron mass to force the taking of my property which in turn forces me into a participatory role in the government of the mass.

Seems complete anarchy is the only thing to push for since every other alternative has the individual who just wants to be left alone being trampled on by the mass. It doesnt matter how small that government is. There will always be a push to use it to force participation either covertly by proxy or overtly with blatant force.

I dont want any part of it. But everybody acts as though leaving me be in Podunk Wyoming all by my lonesome would cause complete collapse of the universe.

ETA: the spontaneous order that developed among human beings throughout history is not the same as government. At least not modern government.
edit on 24-8-2011 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by relpobre000
But saying that everyone in the world can sustain themselves without a government is immature idealism.


.....Then it's a good thing I never said that, isnt it?...


But it's what you've implied. The problem with your argument (though I honestly do agree with you) is that we're all in this together whether you like it or not. There are too many people and there is not enough room for everyone to live miles from civilization.

On a purely philosophical and hypothetical level you're arguing for libertarianism and isolationism. And in theory they work, but what if you're farming in Podunk, Wyoming and a group of people come onto your land and squat in your house? (My guess is that you'll argue that you will have guns to defend yourself).

Let me ask you these questions:
Who would make the rules against taking land that didn't belong to you?
Who would enforce the rules?
Who would ensure your general security?

The answer is, in one form or another, the government.
I hope my argument has made sense as I've been awake for a bit too long


ETA: That 'spontaneous order' is the evolutionary basis for all modern government. All forms of government will turn into this modern monster. You can't logically separate early tribal government from current government. We can philosophically shun it, but in practice it is an undeniably necessary evil.
edit on 24-8-2011 by relpobre000 because: eta eta



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   


Really are they necessary or are communities capable of self goverance?


What do you mean by communities? How is it any different than other forms of government? Local government is still a government. And I am not sure it would be any less corrupt or populistic than other types.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Reply to post by relpobre000
 


There being "too many people" is irrelevant. Not everyone would wish to live this way. Reletively few would I imagine. Being miles from civilization is also irrelevant. I am not miles from civilization yet have a perfectly self sustaining piece of land that in no way interferes with the town ability to grow and of course not many would bother to live this way which further reduces the land requirement.

As far as protection goes I don't believe I would need it. After all I would have nothing worth stealing except a few bushels of tomatoes. Further, nobody protects me from such an assault now as it is. The best this government offers is a vehicle for vengeance after the assault has taken place. Further yet, what concern is it of yours? This mock concern and compassion for fellow man is a major cause of the tyranny we all live under now.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


What I meant was people getting together locally to look after their local interests. Not having one point of power who dictates all.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


But once again your argument is shallow and shortsighted. You can choose to live any way that you like, but there are another 6.9 billion people roaming the planet. What about the 8 million New Yorkers? What about the, almost, 4 million citizens of Los Angeles? (Did you happen to see the anarchy after the Rodney King debacle?)

My argument is that in the real world government is necessary and will always exist and it will, whether you like it or not, be corrupt.

You can stay in your little slice of heaven, believing in the basic goodness of human nature. But, one day, you might find that a bushel of tomatoes might be worth a life.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Reply to post by relpobre000
 


Why would the rest ofthe world collapse into anarchy if I were to be left alone?

All over the country there are huge swaths of government land with "no trespassing" signs. Imagine in there somewhere some guy in a shack with some chickens and a garden.

Now how does that guy nobody even knows is in there cause the entire nation or the world to decay into a cannibalistic free for all?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
"government" can mean anything from stealth bombers to fire departments. it can mean snow plowing and road repairs. it can mean school teachers or park rangers. it can mean supreme court justices or pentagon accountants

look at the london riots. it would only take a month for the world to be a hell hole without consequences to people doing what they want when they want

it's not perfect, but until we evolve from naked apes to true intelligent beings, it beats the stone age by a mile



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
Really are they necessary or are communities capable of self goverance? Should it be a human right to shun government control in favour of a self sustaining life? I think it is and I actually thing it would improve the quality of life for all. I think Goverance is just a big conspiracy to give the very few all of the power. We should be in control of our own destinies and even if you argue that by voting you are choosing, well really are you? Governments ALWAYS lie to get elected.


In the anarchistic stream of thought, mankind can live side-by-side without governments... and be just fine. But the very reason governments came into play was for protecting large numbers of people from larger numbers who took advantage of those who had no such authority.

It hearkens back to a very base line form of feudalism in which small groups of people claim control of small areas and govern themselves. It fails when a larger group attacks and absorbs them... and later, when an even larger group attacks and absorbs the previous absorbers and... dammitol, we're back to the large nation/government thing again.

It really can't be avoided so long as the human condition includes aggression and savagery for the purpose of gaining various forms of wealth and power.
edit on 24-8-2011 by redoubt because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Absolutely not necessary, in the plural that is.

GovernmentS are the problem... We need a new one world order, one government for all people, no states, nations or borders, no military anywhere... Just a minimal global government with minimum laws and enforcement, let the people of the world rule the whole world as they see fit.

Peace and dramatic advancement of the human race would follow... Ah, but that will never happen... So we are doomed to destroy our world and ourselves along with it eventually.



government is the solution....where did you go to school? get off your fat butt and elect or support the politicians that care about the bottom 95% of americans
if you have no government, you have rule by the person that can kill the most people, they are called dictators or kings. pick up a history book will you, and quit wasting sane peoples time.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join