Is anyone here an anarchist?

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Rothbardian, Aug 18, 2009.

  1. Rothbardian

    Rothbardian New Member

    I am an anarcho-capitalist (I understand some leftist anarchists disapprove of the term, which is fine) or a libertarian-anarchist.

    It is a system built upon the combination of the Austrian School of Economics and Individual Anarchism and was set up by a brilliant man named Murray Rothbard.

    For more info, check out and

    Anyone else here hold similar beliefs?

  2. Mirage

    Mirage Administrator Staff Member V.I.P.

    Here's the problem with anarchy. In theory it's the lack of organized government, but in an anarchistic society you'd basically see gangs and mafia taking the place of organized government. If that type of stuff exists in a non-anarchist society, do you honestly think it would just go away if the government decided to close up shop?

    And worse, without a government to keep these underground criminal organizations under control, they would essentially become huge. Gang and mafia leaders aren't generally anarchists, they are opportunists. Don't think we'd have a peaceful society if there was no government. There are too many power hungry people who would fight to become the government if there was none.

    Anarchy and a peaceful society cannot go hand in hand. Also, I don't believe a true anarchist society can even exist. It's a terrible idea.
    Major likes this.
  3. Obsessiforge

    Obsessiforge - Diderot Reborn -

    I was an anarchist for maybe a week after seeing V for Vendetta, but then I realized that the only real part of the whole movement of the film that I'd really admired or connected with was the breath of communication that he managed through imagery and iconography.

    so now I write plays.

    the thing is, anarchism was never Intended to serve as a permanent form of government; the old german guys who came up with the idea wrote it out as basically a two step plan, the first being destruction, only as far as necessary to create a tabula rasa on which the second step could be implemented. the second step is one of creation. so from the ashes of the old, despised government would have to come a new form of government structured by the uprisers. the creation half of the plan is just as much a part of anarchy as the "NO GOVERNMENT, DESTROY ALL" part, but most people neglect that and believe that being an anarchist means reaching the tabula rasa of no government and just staying there.

    I know all that because I did a lot of research on Anarchy when I was writing a play about two kids who thought they understood the concept and ended up burning down their school because of it. in act two one of them's in jail, the other got away because of a seizure, and guy two basically does his best to change what he didn't like about his scholastic society in the chaos (tabula rasa) of the aftermath of the burning, and through the process of rebuilding. he does all this through underground newsletters and comics, etc.

    that wasn't a plug for my own literature, that was the first example I could think of of an implementation of that two-step plan.
  4. Wade8813

    Wade8813 Registered Member

    Anarchy doesn't work.

    In any large society, there would always be too many people who would attempt to take advantage of the lack of laws.

    And even if you had a small group of people who won't take advantage of the lack of laws, you basically have a bunch of people who agree to follow the unwritten rules - if you're going to follow the unwritten rules, they might as well be written.
  5. Mihael_langley

    Mihael_langley Formerly "Maikeru"

    Like the previous posts, its been prooven that society works best, and mankind as a whole with unity.

    Îndividuals searching for whatever they feel right, for their own satisfaction it would bring chaos and disorder.
  6. Mirage

    Mirage Administrator Staff Member V.I.P.

    Exactly. The only way anarchy would work is if everybody was also a pacifist. If nobody ever did anything that would hurt, affect, or even annoy other people.

    Until society can go years without any murders, theft, rape, etc, anarchy shouldn't even be mentioned. I mean, if all of these things are happening now, will they suddenly stop happening if there are no rules and no penalties?

    Anarchy needs to go hand in hand with a Utopian society. Due to human nature, both are impossible.
  7. CaptainObvious

    CaptainObvious Son of Liberty V.I.P.

    Thomas Jefferson once said if men were angels there would be no need for government. I agree with what has been said, anarchy wouldn't work. Criminal organizations would rule, it would be a castrophic mess. Much like a utopian society, it sounds good on paper but doesn't work when applied to real life.
  8. princesa

    princesa Registered Member

    Hoolllly shittake mushrooms. I read the title as 'Is anyone here the antichrist?" :shocked:
  9. Obsessiforge

    Obsessiforge - Diderot Reborn -

    nope, that thread is in subtalk. or Millz sucks dick.
  10. princesa

    princesa Registered Member

    I knew I wasn't THAT crazy. Don't mind me....:cute:

Share This Page