Anarchy is naive? It requires more logic, research, and thought than Statism, that's for sure. Fair enough, if you're offended by the n word I won't call you that again.

 

No, you're missing my point. You claimed that anyone who associates themselves with a Confederate flag is a racist, just because a few moronic rednecks decided to intimidate black people with it. I've seen my fair share of black people showing off Confederate flags, do you think they hate black people and want to go back to slavery?

 

First of all, I never said that if you associate yourself with a confederate flag you are racist. I said that the flag represents racism, not that the people who love to wave them do.

 

Secondly, anarchy. Hey man, I think it's kind of cool and all but absolutely not going to happen in our lifetimes. And even if it did. I believe it to be naive to think that everything will be all puppies and sunshine under an anarchy.

 

Thirdly, I have NEVER seen a black person with a confederate flag but hey, you learn something new everyday. And no, I do not think that they want to slavery.

 

Fourthly, I guess, in retrospect, you can call me naive if you want to. It's your opinion. I have had a long(13 hour work day) so far so I am a little on edge. You're a chill guy.

First of all, I never said that if you associate yourself with a confederate flag you are racist. I said that the flag represents racism, not that the people who love to wave them do.

 

Secondly, anarchy. Hey man, I think it's kind of cool and all but absolutely not going to happen in our lifetimes. And even if it did. I believe it to be naive to think that everything will be all puppies and sunshine under an anarchy.

 

Thirdly, I have NEVER seen a black person with a confederate flag but hey, you learn something new everyday. And no, I do not think that they want to slavery.

 

Fourthly, I guess, in retrospect, you can call me naive if you want to. It's your opinion. I have had a long(13 hour work day) so far so I am a little on edge. You're a chill guy.

 

Anarchy is a separate issue, but to respond to that point: Before the Athenians, people thought democracy was crazy, because they were used to kings and emperors.

 

13 hour work day...yikes. It's all good.

Anarchy is a separate issue, but to respond to that point: Before the Athenians, people thought democracy was crazy, because they were used to kings and emperors.

 

13 hour work day...yikes. It's all good.

 

I'm all for Anarchy. If only I could be sure of its outcome.

I'm all for Anarchy. If only I could be sure of its outcome.

 

That's a good start! I heard an analogy once about that very issue.

 

 

The analogy comes in at the end. The house is on fire now, and we have to do something!

That's a good start! I heard an analogy once about that very issue.

 

 

The analogy comes in at the end. The house is on fire now, and we have to do something!

 

Good cartoon. Good message.

You've got to start somewhere I guess. I still would never call myself an anarchist. But if this country goes down that road someday, I guess I'll be along for the ride.

:cool:

But logically anarchy can't work :/

But logically anarchy can't work :/

 

Yeah, I think it would always end up with some form of government or "ruling body"

But logically anarchy can't work :/

 

Yeah, I think it would always end up with some form of government or "ruling body"

 

GO GO JAY RANGERS

 

*power rangers theme song music*

Yeah, I think it would always end up with some form of government or "ruling body"

 

What empirical evidence do you have for this? You've got to understand the study of human behavior, praexeology, to know for sure whether a government would eventually be established.

 

Of course, we can extrapolate humanity's existence until the sun explodes 11 billion years from now. So it's possible a government might pop into existence sometime between now and then, I'll grant you that. ;)

 

I suspect that an anarchic society would be unwilling to give their money to establish a government, however, particularly with today's existing security technology - automatic weapons, surveillance cameras, and nuclear missiles. Any non-governmental organization (NGO) that possesses these things will be hard-pressed to generate more than enough free cash flow to build up a standing-army.

 

Remember that what differentiates a government from an NGO is their presumed status in society. If there is a single generation of anarchists who raise their children in anarchy... I find it highly unlikely their children will grow up wanting to give half their paycheck and allegiance and freedom to a government. Problems in anarchy aren't solved with government intervention, they are solved through the profit motive.

 

True, anarchy isn't intuitive to us. But I suspect it will be glaringly obvious to a future generation, at least in some part of the world.

 

EDIT: Listen to the lecture I posted by Hans Hoppe, it's really interesting and it will make you think about what's possible in an anarchist society:

 

http://mises.org/MultiMedia/mp3/MU2009/MU2009_Hoppe_07-31-2009.mp3

 

Just right click that and "save file".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Aqfp5iMnw]YouTube - WKUK Anarchy[/ame]

The video is funny, but it assumes that voluntary cooperation based on the exchange of value is impossible without a government, because most people are irrational.

 

Anarchy is not chaos. It's not about sharing, either. It's about voluntary human interaction, which involves trade.

 

Government, on the other hand, makes the claim that trade is detrimental in some aspects of life - paying for roads, defense, or in this case... nuclear energy. Therefore, we must steal money from people (who would otherwise not pay voluntarily) in order to finance these things.

 

Think about this: Have you seen something ridiculously frivolous that costs millions of dollars? Something that isn't necessary at all for society's functioning. Oh yeah, a movie. Or Disney World.

 

These frivolous things exist because of voluntary exchange between individuals. No government had to organize their production and distribution.

 

Now ask yourself this: If free exchange allows for these sort of unnecessary goods/services, why should free trade be incapable of producing goods & services that are absolutely necessary to society's functioning, like roads, electricity, or defense services?

 

Government's existence rests on the idea that without it, people go insane and don't prioritize. Of course, government is comprised of individual human beings, who are just as flawed as the rest of us. Government is not more than the sum of its parts.