Does anarchy = chaos?

[Aqualung]

Or at least, will anarchy be more chaotic than today's society.

I say no. It is rarely ever in anybody's best interest to harm others, and when it is in anybody's best interest, laws rarely stop them. What say ye?

 

[Reverend Rick]

I think the folks calling for anarchy will not be happy with the results.

 

[Inky]

I'm guessing that by anarchy you mean no enforced government. I think we would be much less organized for a short time while everyone was still milling around in densely populated areas, but eventually we would spread out into small groups and become more stable. City life must be highly regulated and managed to be viable. The main difference, besides that, is that it would be uncommon for large groups of people to cooperate in major projects to build infrastructure, do research, etc. In my opinion, most people only trust large groups of strangers when there's a law making it a good idea for the strangers to not go back on their word. Small groups would do just fine, though. In conclusion, society would be just as organized, but much more modular.

 

[kadzbiz]

I guess we would have to look back in time before man evolved to become "civilised" and ask if times were chaotic then? The problem I see is that people (individually or in a group) generally want things their own way and to have it so requires some sort of regulation, thence a regulartory body. Anarchy, in my opinion, cannot last indefinitely. I always think about this when I watch some megalomaniacal villian; like what happens once they've caused all the chaos and conquered the world, surely they would then want some order so they could run the place how they wanted.

 

[PureX]

Lawlessness allows for murdering, raping, and robbing gangs of bullyboys to dominate. There are countless examples throughout human history when the existing methods of maintaining social order have collapsed, and the result is ALWAYS the same. Young males who are prone to violent behavior begin to band together into roving bands of extremely violent thugs. Eventually, the unprotected population must join together to fight them off, and thereby established reasonable order again.

The idea that human beings can live together without laws governing their behavior and some form of police to enforce social order has been proven time and time and time again to be untrue.

 

[Reverend Rick]

You had lynch mobs is what you had. The gangs would get out of hand and the locals would band together and there would be mass bloodshed. You do realize that guns would be necessary to keep order right?

I would kind of be like the old West.

 

[doppelganger]

Order and Chaos have to be in balance. Neither should be feared. And neither should be embraced to the exclusion of the other. Lawlessness and Fascism are the manifestation of extremes resulting from imbalance.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The main problem with anarchic societies is that groups are by definition autonomous.
The result is that if you move between groups ... you don't know the local rules.

The relationship between countries is often anarchic... think of the problems that causes. imagine it multiplied thousands fold between each small community.

Imagine the problems for the simplest trade. or agreement.

The larger the group the greater the need for a common Law.

England once had two legal systems. The Dane law in the north and the Anglo Saxon law in the south; in every respect that mattered it became two countries.

 

[Faminedynasty]

Lawlessness and Fascism are the manifestation of extremes resulting from imbalance.

Interestingly enough, fascism I think, would result from lawlessness say, in the United States, because a lack of representative government or federal govt of any kind would lead to the total domination of corporations, which would essentially become the government.
Even more so than they already have.

 

[doppelganger]

Interestingly enough, fascism I think, would result from lawlessness say, in the United States, because a lack of representative government or federal govt of any kind would lead to the total domination of corporations, which would essentially become the government.
Even more so than they already have.

Very good point. And anarchy results from fascism. It's a vicious circle of violent repression being met by violent revolution, bringing violent repression. It goes back to what I've noticed for years now in politics, the extremes of left and right are ultimately, exactly the same.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Very good point. And anarchy results from fascism. It's a vicious circle of violent repression being met by violent revolution, bringing violent repression. It goes back to what I've noticed for years now in politics, the extremes of left and right are ultimately, exactly the same.

Both in what they do and how they do it, and how they use the power when they get it.
The main difference is the excuses they give for doing it,and the name they give their process.

 

[Aqualung]

I think the folks calling for anarchy will not be happy with the results.

How so? What do you think would be the result, and why?

I guess we would have to look back in time before man evolved to become "civilised" and ask if times were chaotic then? The problem I see is that people (individually or in a group) generally want things their own way and to have it so requires some sort of regulation, thence a regulartory body.

What sorts of things are you talking, and why would they have to be accomplished by a government, rather than a body of indiviuals (like a business)?

Lawlessness allows for murdering, raping, and robbing gangs of bullyboys to dominate.

But why? People already murder, rape, and rob, and they do it for their own reasons. I highly doubt there are people sitting around saying, "Gee, I wish there weren't a law against murdering, or I would rape my neighbour." Add to that that governments have done more murdering and robbing qua governments than individuals have. For example, if there were no government, there would be no way to finance wars, which are the main ways of murdering and robbing. Governments can kill their own citizens and rob them of their money through taxes, so LAWFULNESS apparantly allows those types of situations to dominate anyway. I think there would be less crime, even if there were slightly more individual crime (which I still don't see as happening).

The main problem with anarchic societies is that groups are by definition autonomous.
The result is that if you move between groups ... you don't know the local rules.

Heck, I don't know the local laws. Like just today I found out that I'm actually required to take a lunch break. I had no idea that was a law. Yet, I'm living under a government.

Interestingly enough, fascism I think, would result from lawlessness say, in the United States, because a lack of representative government or federal govt of any kind would lead to the total domination of corporations, which would essentially become the government.

How can corporations dominate without being able to finance governments (and therefore earn governmental validation)?

 

[Trollin_for_Fun]

I think anarchy will be chaotic for as long as it exist. Unless someone is around to enforce the anarchy, then someone with a bit of charisma will come along and unite some people and then subjugate others. I think, to make it easier to survive, and to become more comfortable, people will do away with anarchy soon after it is imposed.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think the folks calling for anarchy will not be happy with the results.

I would.

Rather than going back to quote many posts, I will simply state how it would work.
Despite popular beliefe, the people do actually govern a society in Anarchy. You can steal, rape, murder, and so on. However, should you commit such crimes against society, the person you harmed, or a random person who is going to seek vengance for the wronged, can equally or more severly repay the offending party.
Go ahead, rape the girl next door....you can't go to jail, as there are none. But her father has every right to lock you in his basement and brutally beat and torture you.
Gangs can run rampant, but a small militia of peace loving gun owners will show up to gun them down.
Anarchy IS NOT a state of lawlessness and chaos. The people keep others in check.

Theoretically, crimes will actually go down, just because there is no running, no judicial/legal system, no cops to step in, and no laws to seek revenge on those who wronged you. Criminals today know they have rights. Under anarchy, commiting a crime leaves your life forfeit. Or at least might result in broken bones.

 

[PureX]

People already murder, rape, and rob, and they do it for their own reasons. I highly doubt there are people sitting around saying, "Gee, I wish there weren't a law against murdering, or I would rape my neighbour."

And you would be quite wrong in that assumption. There are a surprising number of murderers, rapists, and thieves living among us who will quite happily and quickly express those desires were they to imagine that they can get away with it. The people in our society that 'do it anyway' are just the most extreme and careless among them. And the reason we know this is true is because throughout all of human history, whenever the mechanisms of social order have collapsed, a whole lot of otherwise law-abiding citizens became rapists, murderers and thieves, almost immediately. This is not make-believe, or exaggeration. The whole reason that human societies have developed the rule of law is exacly because of this phenomenon.

Add to that that governments have done more murdering and robbing qua governments than individuals have. For example, if there were no government, there would be no way to finance wars, which are the main ways of murdering and robbing.

You really need to read some history. Governments don't kill anyone. Governments are simply a method of organizing ourselves so that we can express our desires en masse. When organized groups of people kill it's because the majority of those people want to. And make no mistake, bloodlust is alive and well in the human species. Especially among young adult males. We are social animals, and when that bloodlust is stirred up, whole societies of humans become murderous. Then, not even the rule of law can stop it.

But before we reach that point, we have always living among us a significant percentage of human beings who are prone to murder, rape, and robbery, given the opportunity. And should the opportunity occur, their lust for such violent and selfish behavior will quickly increase and they'll be joined by more who feel the same desire. And it's these people who have taught us to establish and very carefully mind the rule of law within our own social groups. We have learned as a species, through bitter experience, how quickly our own friends and neighbors can become murderous criminals.

Frankly, I'm a bit astonished to see people actually proposing anarchy, seriously. The depth of ignorance behind such an idea is truly frightening. And it just shows us how far we Americans have sunk into ignorance and idiocy. It's even worse then that. We've sunk into some kind of willful perversity where we actually believe that up is down and down is up, and that lawlessness and violence will bring us a better life.

This really is complete idiocy. It's worse than complete idiocy in that it's idiocy coupled with a desire to see human beings murder, rape, and rob each other.

 

[Reverend Rick]

OK, to answer several questions above, I believe some groups are more ready for a riot, anarchy or whatever than others. How many rounds of ammunition do you have on hand right now? How many like minded individuals could you arm with a gun if you had to? How much training have they had?

The people who are prepared for this day are right wing extremist groups and some left wing radicals. The right winged groups have had military training where the left wing radicals are not as well prepared.

You will either be preyed upon by people that Purex described above or controlled by people who would respect your family but impose more right wing ideals on the community. God, Guns and Guts would be the order of the day.

 

[doppelganger]

You will either be preyed upon by people that Purex described above or controlled by people who would respect your family but impose more right wing ideals on the community. God, Guns and Guts would be the order of the day.

Exactly. Hence, my tips for the end of the world.

 

[Random]

NO. Anarchy is the end of the chaos of un-natural order.

 

[Aqualung]

And you would be quite wrong in that assumption.

Oh, is that so. I hope you back that up shortly.

There are a surprising number of murderers, rapists, and thieves living among us who will quite happily and quickly express those desires were they to imagine that they can get away with it.

Yeah, DESPITE the laws. I never said crime would go away, after all, I just said that laws don't stop anybody.

Besides, if they're not doing it already, they probably just don't really have the desire, and are just trying to be cool.

The people in our society that 'do it anyway' are just the most extreme and careless among them. And the reason we know this is true is because throughout all of human history, whenever the mechanisms of social order have collapsed, a whole lot of otherwise law-abiding citizens became rapists, murderers and thieves, almost immediately.

Is that so? When did that happen? You're going to need to back up statements that reference "all of human history".

This is not make-believe, or exaggeration. The whole reason that human societies have developed the rule of law is exacly because of this phenomenon.

No, they have developed to subjugate.

You really need to read some history. Governments don't kill anyone. Governments are simply a method of organizing ourselves so that we can express our desires en masse.

Well, if that's true, then governments are more dangerous, because they actually CAN carry out our desires en masse. If people will naturally fall into a state of crime (as you state) without a government, then they must naturally be crime-ful creatures. BUt, they are individuals who can't really do that much. But when they band together into a government, THEN the en masse (crime-ful) desires can be realised.

When organized groups of people kill it's because the majority of those people want to.

Well, then, let's get ride of those organised groups, like governments, that actually allow people to carry out their wishes. An Hitler would have had a hard time committing genocide, but Germany did it without much resitance.

But before we reach that point, we have always living among us a significant percentage of human beings who are prone to murder, rape, and robbery, given the opportunity.

Yeah, that's true. And that desire is usually not related to actual law.

We have learned as a species, through bitter experience, how quickly our own friends and neighbors can become murderous criminals.

Yeah, and that still occures in this governed society.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You will either be preyed upon by people that Purex described above or controlled by people who would respect your family but impose more right wing ideals on the community. God, Guns and Guts would be the order of the day.

That leans more towards fascism.
Under anarchy, you don't push people around, you don't bully, and personal differences are either set aside or settled during a duel.

OK, to answer several questions above, I believe some groups are more ready for a riot, anarchy or whatever than others. How many rounds of ammunition do you have on hand right now? How many like minded individuals could you arm with a gun if you had to? How much training have they had?

I know a few people who are arms dealers in the black market. Think thats enough? Plenty of ex-military people as well. But ammunition would only be necessary for awhile. Do you think riots and thefts will be common if the rioters and thieves no that even someone watching there crimes can shoot back?

NO. Anarchy is the end of the chaos of un-natural order.

This statement is true.