• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

This is why anarchy wouldn't work

C

CPS01

New member
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
30
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Hi again!
Since my last thread "Why wouldn't anarchy work?" I have made a couple of reflections. I have come up with 5 flaws in the anarchistic ideology, that i would like to hear your reasoned and objective rebuttals against.

Present your arguments against these 5 claims:

1. Without government money will become worthless.
Who will regulate the amount printed? Who will stop people making counterfeit money? A modern society cannot work on barter alone, there needs to be some kind of currency to determine the value of goods and services.

2. Public services will only be available to the rich.
Without the government, things like the police, the fire department and health care will all become completely privatized which poor people will not be able to afford. Doesn’t everyone deserve protection from crime? Why should the survival of a sick or injured patient be determined by how much wealth they have?

3. Without the government, there is nobody to protect the rights of the invidividual.
How will we stop terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda getting their hands on nuclear or biological weapons? How can we stop businesses enslaving their workers? Who will tell the scientist his ethical boundaries in performing experiments? What will stop organized criminal mobs taking over society by force?

4. We would no longer be able to stop global warming
Call me insane, but I think if you gave businesses the choice they would care more about money than the environment. It’s not just greenhouse gasses either, these guys could totally rape the environment without consequence. All the forests cut down, all the rivers poisoned, the land stuffed with toxic waste and the sky filled with pollutive gas.

5. The Government is good for the economy.
The government provides corporations with infrastructure for trade, an educated workforce and a secure environment to do business in.
 
CPS01 said:
..........
Click to expand...

I am not sure, where you want to go. There are a number of goods ie services that are classfied as public goods as they can be used by all, once they have been produced (non-exclusion principal). Now these can be produced by individuals, but like policing there will be a certain danger of the power needed to police will be used to extract payments from others that do not have the power to police. In effect, this is the first state of government.
 
CPS01 said:
Hi again!
Since my last thread "Why wouldn't anarchy work?" I have made a couple of reflections. I have come up with 5 flaws in the anarchistic ideology, that i would like to hear your reasoned and objective rebuttals against.

Present your arguments against these 5 claims:

1. Without government money will become worthless.
Who will regulate the amount printed? Who will stop people making counterfeit money? A modern society cannot work on barter alone, there needs to be some kind of currency to determine the value of goods and services.

2. Public services will only be available to the rich.
Without the government, things like the police, the fire department and health care will all become completely privatized which poor people will not be able to afford. Doesn’t everyone deserve protection from crime? Why should the survival of a sick or injured patient be determined by how much wealth they have?

3. Without the government, there is nobody to protect the rights of the invidividual.
How will we stop terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda getting their hands on nuclear or biological weapons? How can we stop businesses enslaving their workers? Who will tell the scientist his ethical boundaries in performing experiments? What will stop organized criminal mobs taking over society by force?

4. We would no longer be able to stop global warming
Call me insane, but I think if you gave businesses the choice they would care more about money than the environment. It’s not just greenhouse gasses either, these guys could totally rape the environment without consequence. All the forests cut down, all the rivers poisoned, the land stuffed with toxic waste and the sky filled with pollutive gas.

5. The Government is good for the economy.
The government provides corporations with infrastructure for trade, an educated workforce and a secure environment to do business in.
Click to expand...

You obviously do not understand anarchism as a political philosophy and do not know the strains of anarchist thought such an anarcho-syndicalism.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
You obviously do not understand anarchism as a political philosophy and do not know the strains of anarchist thought such an anarcho-syndicalism.
Click to expand...

Please, enlighten me with your wisdom.
 
You didn't need to write all of these reasons, you really only had to give one:

Anarchy won't work because armed roaming gangs will rape your family and put a bullet in your head. We've tried it, and it sucks, that's why we invented society.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
You didn't need to write all of these reasons, you really only had to give one:

Anarchy won't work because armed roaming gangs will rape your family and put a bullet in your head. We've tried it, and it sucks, that's why we invented society.
Click to expand...

You must use the unique definition of the word anarchy that was presented in another thread.
 
CPS01 said:
Please, enlighten me with your wisdom.
Click to expand...

To get a basic understanding of anarchism as a political philosophy, I would suggest reading What Is Anarchism? by Alexander Berkman. It's an extremely accessible read. You seem to assume that anarchism is just people doing whatever they want, when in reality, there is a very organized society and we have seen this in indigenous groups, the Spanish Civil War, and the Paris Commune, just to name a few places historically.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
To get a basic understanding of anarchism as a political philosophy, I would suggest reading What Is Anarchism? by Alexander Berkman. It's an extremely accessible read. You seem to assume that anarchism is just people doing whatever they want, when in reality, there is a very organized society and we have seen this in indigenous groups, the Spanish Civil War, and the Paris Commune, just to name a few places historically.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be democracy? Words change their meanings over time and to most people nowadays anarchy means total chaos.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
To get a basic understanding of anarchism as a political philosophy, I would suggest reading What Is Anarchism? by Alexander Berkman. It's an extremely accessible read. You seem to assume that anarchism is just people doing whatever they want, when in reality, there is a very organized society and we have seen this in indigenous groups, the Spanish Civil War, and the Paris Commune, just to name a few places historically.
Click to expand...

Some sanity at last! Great post, actually someone that understands the concept of Anarchy beyond cartoon caricatures.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
To get a basic understanding of anarchism as a political philosophy, I would suggest reading What Is Anarchism? by Alexander Berkman. It's an extremely accessible read. You seem to assume that anarchism is just people doing whatever they want, when in reality, there is a very organized society and we have seen this in indigenous groups, the Spanish Civil War, and the Paris Commune, just to name a few places historically.
Click to expand...

If you have read and understood "What Is Anarchism?" - then why don't you just go ahead and save me a lot of time, and argue against the 5 claims i have stated in my initial post?

albert-einstein-if-you-cant-explain-it-simply-you-dont-understand-it-well-enough.jpg
 
CPS01 said:
Hi again!
Since my last thread "Why wouldn't anarchy work?" I have made a couple of reflections. I have come up with 5 flaws in the anarchistic ideology, that i would like to hear your reasoned and objective rebuttals against.

Present your arguments against these 5 claims:

1. Without government money will become worthless.
Who will regulate the amount printed? Who will stop people making counterfeit money? A modern society cannot work on barter alone, there needs to be some kind of currency to determine the value of goods and services.

2. Public services will only be available to the rich.
Without the government, things like the police, the fire department and health care will all become completely privatized which poor people will not be able to afford. Doesn’t everyone deserve protection from crime? Why should the survival of a sick or injured patient be determined by how much wealth they have?

3. Without the government, there is nobody to protect the rights of the invidividual.
How will we stop terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda getting their hands on nuclear or biological weapons? How can we stop businesses enslaving their workers? Who will tell the scientist his ethical boundaries in performing experiments? What will stop organized criminal mobs taking over society by force?

4. We would no longer be able to stop global warming
Call me insane, but I think if you gave businesses the choice they would care more about money than the environment. It’s not just greenhouse gasses either, these guys could totally rape the environment without consequence. All the forests cut down, all the rivers poisoned, the land stuffed with toxic waste and the sky filled with pollutive gas.

5. The Government is good for the economy.
The government provides corporations with infrastructure for trade, an educated workforce and a secure environment to do business in.
Click to expand...

OK, I am a Socialist so, I see Anarchy as a possible outcome of socialism but, an unlikely one in which case I would look at Anarchism and rather than have a hissy fit about chaos and disorder I would ask what we can learn from the philosophy. Ironically, it appears that I am the Socialist arguing for little or no government around here, go figure.

All of your questions are really concerned with at what appropriate level we have organisation. For example, at local level why can't we barter? At city or county level can we collectively organise fire services and health care? At national level, how do we keep our borders secure? At international level, how do we secure the environment? Each activity has a level at which it becomes too national and then remote from people and to close to central power or to local to make best use of collective resources. My argument is that learning a few things from the Anarchists might help us rationalise this more easily, take responsibility and stop central governments from drawing in resources and power.
 
William Rea said:
OK, I am a Socialist so, I see Anarchy as a possible outcome of socialism but, an unlikely one in which case I would look at Anarchism and rather than have a hissy fit about chaos and disorder I would ask what we can learn from the philosophy. Ironically, it appears that I am the Socialist arguing for little or no government around here, go figure.

All of your questions are really concerned with at what appropriate level we have organisation. For example, at local level why can't we barter? At city or county level can we collectively organise fire services and health care? At national level, how do we keep our borders secure? At international level, how do we secure the environment? Each activity has a level at which it becomes too national and then remote from people and to close to central power or to local to make best use of collective resources. My argument is that learning a few things from the Anarchists might help us rationalise this more easily, take responsibility and stop central governments from drawing in resources and power.
Click to expand...

What you're saying is: "Anarchism is great in theory, but won't work in practice. But we can learn something from the ideology". Is that correctly understood?
 
CPS01 said:
Hi again!
Since my last thread "Why wouldn't anarchy work?" I have made a couple of reflections. I have come up with 5 flaws in the anarchistic ideology, that i would like to hear your reasoned and objective rebuttals against.

Present your arguments against these 5 claims:

1. Without government money will become worthless.
Who will regulate the amount printed? Who will stop people making counterfeit money? A modern society cannot work on barter alone, there needs to be some kind of currency to determine the value of goods and services.

2. Public services will only be available to the rich.
Without the government, things like the police, the fire department and health care will all become completely privatized which poor people will not be able to afford. Doesn’t everyone deserve protection from crime? Why should the survival of a sick or injured patient be determined by how much wealth they have?

3. Without the government, there is nobody to protect the rights of the invidividual.
How will we stop terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda getting their hands on nuclear or biological weapons? How can we stop businesses enslaving their workers? Who will tell the scientist his ethical boundaries in performing experiments? What will stop organized criminal mobs taking over society by force?

4. We would no longer be able to stop global warming
Call me insane, but I think if you gave businesses the choice they would care more about money than the environment. It’s not just greenhouse gasses either, these guys could totally rape the environment without consequence. All the forests cut down, all the rivers poisoned, the land stuffed with toxic waste and the sky filled with pollutive gas.

5. The Government is good for the economy.
The government provides corporations with infrastructure for trade, an educated workforce and a secure environment to do business in.
Click to expand...

You realize that its a moot argument right? True anarchy cannot occur with ANY form of organization.

That is chaos, even dogs have structure and order.
 
Fearandloathing said:
You realize that its a moot argument right? True anarchy cannot occur with ANY form of organization.

That is chaos, even dogs have structure and order.
Click to expand...

When I talk about anarchy, I refer to a society without a publicly enforced government.
 
William Rea said:
Some sanity at last! Great post, actually someone that understands the concept of Anarchy beyond cartoon caricatures.
Click to expand...

Would you like to live in a non-cartoon Anarchic system? What would be the advantages?
 
zyzygy said:
Would you like to live in a non-cartoon Anarchic system? What would be the advantages?
Click to expand...

No, I would like to live in a World where people understand what they are criticising. The advantages of that would be some really interesting discussions. From Evolution to Anarchy.
 
William Rea said:
No, I would like to live in a World where people understand what they are criticising. The advantages of that would be some really interesting discussions. From Evolution to Anarchy.
Click to expand...

I was just enquiring as to what life would be like under such a system. It would help me to understand it better. if you understand it so well then you must have an inkling of what living in such a system would be like.
 
CPS01 said:
What you're saying is: "Anarchism is great in theory, but won't work in practice. But we can learn something from the ideology". Is that correctly understood?
Click to expand...

Yes, just like Capitalism is great in theory, and Communism is great in theory, and Democracy is great in theory but we can learn from all of them.
 
zyzygy said:
Would you like to live in a non-cartoon Anarchic system? What would be the advantages?
Click to expand...

I believe the appealing part of anarchism is the ideological principal assumption that, theoretically, no one should control you.
In practice I believe anarchy would lead to the exact opposite though, unfortunately.
 
zyzygy said:
So you don't know? Fair enough. I was just enquiring as to what life would be like under such a system. It would help me to understand it better.
Click to expand...

I don't think you were but hey, I've had enough of the snark today and you have already declared no interest in the subject

zyzygy said:
I don't have an analysis, the subject is not very interesting, I have no problem with it because I don't see any Western democracies converting to Anarcho-Capitalism any time soon.I wouldn't want to live in a bartering system, I don't have much to offer. Cheers.
Click to expand...

so go bait and report someone else huh?
 
CPS01 said:
When I talk about anarchy, I refer to a society without a publicly enforced government.
Click to expand...

Oh...

what then, a government of your imagination?

Look, have had this debate too many times and it always ends up in the same place, long winded excuses and neo definitions all to hide a personality that cannot accept life on life's terms.

If anarchy is so hot why, in 10,000 years has man always gravitated to order, structure and "publicly enforced" government, whatever the hell that is...new definitions of old and failed ideas cannot make those tired and failed ideas work any better than before.

I'm done here.
 
William Rea said:
I don't think you were but hey, I've had enough of the snark today and you have already declared no interest in the subject
Click to expand...
I have no interest in the high-falutin' theory but I am interested in how daily life would be under such a system. How would things work if nobody was in charge? That is the bit that I have a problem with. I appreciate the point about anarchy meaning 'lack of a ruler' Does that mean absolutely no rulers, nobody in charge? I'm not trying to be funny but how would our local supermarket work if nobody was in charge? If one staff member told the other staff members what to do then it would not be anarchy any more. If this is just a hypothetical philosophy thread then I will bow out.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Oh...

what then, a government of your imagination?

Look, have had this debate too many times and it always ends up in the same place, long winded excuses and neo definitions all to hide a personality that cannot accept life on life's terms.

If anarchy is so hot why, in 10,000 years has man always gravitated to order, structure and "publicly enforced" government, whatever the hell that is...new definitions of old and failed ideas cannot make those tired and failed ideas work any better than before.

I'm done here.
Click to expand...

Wow. I'm not even pro-anarchism, I was just clarifying my definition of anarchy. :lol:
 
CPS01 said:
Wow. I'm not even pro-anarchism, I was just clarifying my definition of anarchy. :lol:
Click to expand...

The popular definition differs from the dictionary definition.
 
zyzygy said:
I have no interest in the high-falutin' theory but I am interested in how daily life would be under such a system. How would things work if nobody was in charge? That is the bit that I have a problem with. I appreciate the point about anarchy meaning 'lack of a ruler' Does that mean absolutely no rulers, nobody in charge? I'm not trying to be funny but how would our local supermarket work if nobody was in charge? If one staff member told the other staff members what to do then it would not be anarchy any more. If this is just a hypothetical philosophy thread then I will bow out.
Click to expand...

William Rea said earlier: "Anarchism is great in theory, but won't work in practice."

Now you can stop your squabbling. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom