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.


What would happen if there was no G0vernement WHAT SO EVER???

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 3 2013 @ 06:27 AM
So the OP - no Government - none.

We would all be better off and more secure.

Clans would stick together and revenge any and all wrongs.

Clans would be made up of family and friends and their families.

We would all have more - on account of - no gubberment would be their taking what you make - in this case probably growing food and hunting.

Of course - a Man works from sunup to sundown but a woman's work is never done.

Government is the worst investment I have ever been robbed out of.

posted on Oct, 3 2013 @ 06:29 AM
What would happen?? Russia and China would take over the country and create a new government..

posted on Oct, 3 2013 @ 06:30 AM


Government is the worst investment I have ever been robbed out of.

Government is not an investment. Before the federal reserve the government did not earn interest on money it created. Everything was backed by Gold and the government couldn't steal from you. Your beef is not with government it's with central banks..

posted on Oct, 3 2013 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by swanne

There are such actors and politically motivated organizations in US and Canada too, you know.

Whats your point?

My point was that foreign and local politically motivated organizations have used aggression for over a hundred years to implement some form of control over Somalia. The end goal of all these organizations is to establish a monopoly of power in that nation. Just because some of these forces are practically governments in exile does not diminish the fact that if given the opportunity they would establish there own form control. So in no way is this "anarchy". One might call it chaos, but chaos and anarchy are not necessarily synonymous, especially when you are using the definitions of classical anarchist philosophers.

Hell there are countries in the west that are experiencing chaos in one form or an other right now, no one would call it a result of anarchy because the governments are the ones who are the main source of the problems not renegade bandit lords raiding towns.

posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 12:10 AM


Okay let me ask you a question. What's worse.... some guy who you know is your enemy and who's openly telling you, showing you, and at odds with you. So you know who he is and what he's doing and you're keeping your eye on him, and his on you. so you're just basically enemies.....


An enemy that is the same, want's the worst for you, wants to kill you, but with a think he's one of your friends. Whenever you talk to him he acts as if he's one of your best friends. But secretly he's out to harm you, and you don't even know it.

Good point... but, by definition, the latter would be exactly undistinguishable than a true friend. Thus, the sentence "10 times worst" would be invalid since in truth, one could make no such distinction.

What if, for example, the government's action was caused by the fact that someone in some Council on Foreign Something holds him by the place where the sun don't shine?...

Anyway, Food for thought.

edit on 3-10-2013 by swanne because: (no reason given)

but still as an agent of the shadow g-v they're still duplicidise

top topics
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in