I believe that anarchy is the ultimate state of evolution in the human race political structure...what are your thoughts on this subject?
Dust to Dust, Ashes to Ashes, it is odd that the highest human evolution can go is reverting back to an era of anarchy. Man in theory should revert to Marx's first epoch of history which is basically the first communistic era. Albeit I would assume that we would still be a bit better off, but the basic premise of anarchy is appealing to almost everyone. Notice that almost all political-economic philosophies want anarchy. Communism, Capitalism, Anarchists, libertarians, etc. The reason is simply all eventually end up in the freedom of all man. The difference between them all is the means not the end. Man will forever be fighting with the means, not being able to achieve the ends.
I disagree..I believe that democracy and all the others political influences that talk about freedom are nothing more that a mean of control from those who have the so called power in their hands against we all...anarchy is the only "political" structure where no one will inflict his power against any other...it is the only society where freedom can be achieved by all
Lets define anarchy first...... 1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority. 2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order. So you think this would be a wise thing to have for humanity? I'd think not by this definition.
You got it cosmictraveler. Such a state of being decays into tyranny which means we can lump the two together as the same phenomenon, that is, anarchy and tyranny are two sides of the same coin. Seems humanity has been oscillating between the two extremes for all of its existence. How to get that coin to balance on its edge may be the question who's answer determines whether or not humanity becomes a long lived species. 'Tis difficult to see this as society is a second order cybernetic system, impossible to observe without involvment. Have to take great pains to avoid bias. Try stripping your thoughts of all proper nouns for a start. Seems to me that then you start to look at relationships rather than decreed allusion.
if the society where you live is order...then I think that "chaos" is a good point for a new beginning
Please visit Iran to see what it could be like living under Islamic Laws and rules. If you don't like where you live there's always another country that you can move to to start living their way. Chaos is as bad as anarchy because it leads to the same end, lawlessness and disorder.
DigitalPlague wrote: As long as there is life things can always be worse. In Italy, my father-in-law suffered through WW2, but he told me that it only got worse after Mussolini was hung from a meat-hook. Gangs of armed men traveled from village to village taking whatever they wanted and killing whomever they pleased. For him, life was better under Nazi occupation than it was under this home-grown anarchy. I'm telling you that no matter how bad our civilization is, no civilization at all would be even worse. I'm fairly certain that you wouldn't like to live with anarchy. Michael
orthogonal you say..... "For him, life was better under Nazi occupation than it was under this home-grown anarchy." Tell that to the Jews that were gassed by the Nazies, I'm certain they wouldn't agree with you at all.
In order for anarchy to be successful three things have to happen: i) decrease of ego, or increase of ego. ii) Learning has to be reformed. iii) All philosophies should be abandoned, or just religious, political, and economic phils. Basically either society gets dumber, or smarter.
Cosmic wrote: Firstly, I can't tell anything to the Jews that were gassed for the simple reason that they're dead. Secondly, if it were possible to tell the dead Jews that my father-in-law's life was more miserable with anarchy than under the German occupation, why do think that they would disagree? Do you think they'd try to convince me that his wartime experience was impossible? Thirdly, I'm not quite sure of the point that you're trying to make, but please bear in mind my lead sentence from above: "As long as there is life things can always be worse." A good many Jews knew they weren't going to take a shower; they knew they were going to their death. So why did they walk into the gas chamber under their own power? I can't speak for any of them, but I can very easily imagine that some feared the SS guards with their machine guns and their snarling German Shepards more than they feared walking into a gas chamber. The Nazis used gassing as an efficient means for for the mass production of death; it was not, primarily, a means for torture. The Nazi's had much better tools for inflicting torture than their gas chambers. Again, as long as there is life things can always be worse. The flip-side of this is that things can always be better. That's the domain of human hope. At least as many Jews walked into the gas chamber hoping, beyond all reason, that it was only a shower after all. "The natural flights of the human mind are not from pleasure to pleasure, but from hope to hope." Samuel Johnson Michael
I think Hobbes had it right. Without government we are in a state of nature, anarchy, which is a brutal dog eat dog world, and ultimately at each other's throat. Government was seen not just as a means of protecting us from external forces, but from internal forces, ourselves, as well.
Without government we are in a state of nature, anarchy, which is a brutal dog eat dog world, and ultimately at each other's throat Not in communist doctrine, although I agree with that characterization. It is not a definite, we assume man would have the same amount of capitalist influence as now?
