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.

 

Why do we have a goverment/hierarchy in society?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 09:28 AM
link   
There is not such thing as abuse in authority, the fact of authority IS abuse we need no rulers.

The myth that people need authority for this 'save us from ourselves' idea is rubbish. The myth that people have this anti-social intolerance to each other built into our human nature is simply not true.

And so what is the solution- since we believe we cannot govern ourselves??

we put a group of completely HONEST and incredible CLEVER people in charge of us who conveniently dont share this self destructive flaw in human nature that us 'lesser' people have.

We need to let our kings queens and princes know that their days are numbered i have no need for a government or any hierarchy in my society and i'm sure you dont either. what do you think?




posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 09:44 AM
link   
hmmmm, i understand your point, but at the same time i dont. i guess not so much that i dont understand, just that i dont agree. While it has been proven that other types of ruling a country works, such as communism in china, i think that our govt is just fine. if we didnt have the govt we have today, there are many changes that would insue, many for the worse, For instance, operations and business that are govt funded would cease to exist, leaving ppl unimployed, plus the govt helps out with many other things. perhaps if there were no govt in the first place it wouldnt be so bad, but changing it would be bad. But then again......THEY KEEP STUFF FROM US!!!! THEY NEED TO DIE!!! lol jk. well, thats my thought on the subject



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Are you happy with your goverment funded buisnesses? how many complaints do you hear over the NHS? (just check out the medical conspiracies idea to get a better idea). The goverment is not their to protect people from people but to protect people from the goverment- they need profit from these organisations to stay in power.

You say that we shouldnt bother with trying to change something that you agree is negative? Have you not noticed the increased power and restrictions the goverement has put over the people recently? in a few years we could be completely subservient to it- we need to act early on.

lets try an analogy.... you have this little spot on your nose (yep you guessed it- the government) but your not really bothered by it, you still go out and chill with your friends and hardly anyone notices. in a few weeks your spot will turn into a giant septic pus-filled boil of oppression that will be affecting your everyday life- you wont be able to leave the house without feeling completely self-conscious of yourself etc.

Lets pick of the spot now...



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Avoidance of Anarchy...thats your prime reason.


seekerof



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 10:41 AM
link   
The only people who could not benefit from anarchy are the 'higher uppers' and since they have inherited the most power it is in their interest to keep it.

People consider anarchy as chaos and destruction- lose this clich its untrue and imposed by the very people that it is trying to protect this is what brainwashing is. Free your mind and dont let second hand clichs do your thinking for you.

Respect.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
LAWS

If anarchy existed, I could come over and shoot you because I thought your wife looked good.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoeyC
The only people who could not benefit from anarchy are the 'higher uppers' and since they have inherited the most power it is in their interest to keep it.


The ones who suffer under anarchy are the unloveable/weird (and we're all a little fringe-y sometimes) and those with no friends and no power. If you'll look at Africa (Mogadishu and other places where currently there is no government and it's pretty much an anarchy), you'll see that the wealthy actually benefit because they can afford private armies and can do land grabs and have their enemies killed. With no government around, they can set themselves up as kings.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 12:03 AM
link   
I'd rather not have a small group of rediculously powerful individuals controlling my life. All I can say is that Marxism is the #1 way to reach any form of stable classless and structured society.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by JoeyC
The only people who could not benefit from anarchy are the 'higher uppers' and since they have inherited the most power it is in their interest to keep it.


The ones who suffer under anarchy are the unloveable/weird (and we're all a little fringe-y sometimes) and those with no friends and no power. If you'll look at Africa (Mogadishu and other places where currently there is no government and it's pretty much an anarchy), you'll see that the wealthy actually benefit because they can afford private armies and can do land grabs and have their enemies killed. With no government around, they can set themselves up as kings.


actually thats called a tyranny. it ceases to be anarchy (technically) at that point. the real disadvantages to anarchy are keeping it one and resource gathering/distribution.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Very simple.
There are two types of people: Those "with" and those "without".

Now to answer the question....

Those "with" want it to stay that way, thats why we have a top-down hierarchy.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join