[QUOTE=thisispain;40148620]your TWO points are atrocious.
if freedom of individuals leads to corruption and evil then explain how a nation with no freedom of individuals such as North Korea can be so utterly corrupt and evil?
you should first start off by defining what the word "work" means in this context anyway, otherwise its a meaningless term.
and you can assume that hospitals "and shit" would be maintained because people want them to be maintained, not because the system of government is different
[editline]3rd April 2013[/editline]
this doesnt make any sense fyi
hospitals can exist without a national institution[/QUOTE]
The hospital would have to have people to want to help others. Either way there would be no infrastructure, IE phonelines or helplines for people. If i think what you're referring to, I think you mean Anarcho-Communism where small communes band together. IE the system in the hospital, police, services, working for a common goal. In anarchy you wouldn't have that as there would be no benefit to the people in the hospital to help anyone.
[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;40148698]The hospital would have to have people to want to help others. Either way there would be no infrastructure, IE phonelines or helplines for people. If i think what you're referring to, I think you mean Anarcho-Communism where small communes band together. IE the system in the hospital, police, services, working for a common goal. In anarchy you wouldn't have that as there would be no benefit to the people in the hospital to help anyone.[/QUOTE]
anarchy is about free agency. if a group of people came together to work towards a common goal it would still be anarchy because anarchy is simply a stateless society
lets not confuse anarchy as the word is commonly used with the philosophy
[QUOTE=thisispain;40148743]anarchy is about free agency. if a group of people came together to work towards a common goal it would still be anarchy because anarchy is simply a stateless society
lets not confuse anarchy as the word is commonly used with the philosophy[/QUOTE]
The hospital is a state within itself. It's governed by people is it not?
Let's not confuse anarchy for something it really isn't.
What you're still thinking of is anarcho communism. The states present are not in a true anarchy. Hospitals are basic forms of order, which is contrary to the anarchic ideal. Much the same with police and firefighters. It's still a form of institution. Just maybe called something different. They would have their own rules and protections-Not an anarchic idea either way. It may be anarcho communism, But not true anarchy as it really is, no form of government, basic or not.
[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;40148903]The hospital is a state within itself. It's governed by people is it not? [/QUOTE]
a hospital isnt a state no, theres no system of government in a hospital.......
[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;40148903]What you're still thinking of is anarcho communism.[/QUOTE]
anarcho communism is the marxist implementation of anarchist thought
[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;40148903]The states present are not in a true anarchy. Hospitals are basic forms of order, which is contrary to the anarchic ideal. Much the same with police and firefighters. It's still a form of institution. Just maybe called something different. They would have their own rules and protections-Not an anarchic idea either way. It may be anarcho communism, But not true anarchy as it really is, no form of government, basic or not.[/QUOTE]
but anarchy isnt the lack of order, thats not consistent with its philosophy
again thats just how the word is used, not the actual anarchist school of thought which is what the op is dealing with
[QUOTE=thisispain;40148950]a hospital isnt a state no, theres no system of government in a hospital.......
anarcho communism is the marxist implementation of anarchist thought
but anarchy isnt the lack of order, thats not consistent with its philosophy
again thats just how the word is used, not the actual anarchist school of thought which is what the op is dealing with[/QUOTE]
If it's just anarchic schools of thought then you could call a lot of those things anarchy. The entire school of thought is a huge, and it seems like he was talking about just anarchy, which is pretty much impossible, as the entire idea is no governing force.
[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;40148988]If it's just anarchic schools of thought then you could call a lot of those things anarchy. The entire school of thought is a huge, and it seems like he was talking about just anarchy, which is pretty much impossible, as the entire idea is no governing force.[/QUOTE]
but "just" anarchy isnt an actual school of thought it wouldnt make sense to write a thesis about it
1. Somalia
2. Somalia
3. Somalia
[QUOTE=F T;40149135]1. Somalia
2. Somalia
3. Somalia[/QUOTE]
somalia's anarchic communities were done out of need during its civil war and considering they were under an incredibly brutal dictatorship thats a very weak argument
and its repeated three times which makes it suck even harder
Also anarchy only ever exists during short transitional periods. If you look at any example of a state of "anarchy" in recent history it's always overwrote very soon after it's "established."
[QUOTE=thisispain;40148620]
if freedom of individuals leads to corruption and evil then explain how a nation with no freedom of individuals such as North Korea can be so utterly corrupt and evil?[/QUOTE]
just because a lack of order leads to corruption doesn't mean the presence of order prevents it
you can still be a vile and corrupt individual whether or not there's a system of government in place
while I understand that his point was poorly written and he needs to expand upon it, using the opposite extreme in order to validate your own stance is ust silly
[QUOTE=Unisath;40150309]just because a lack of order leads to corruption doesn't mean the presence of order prevents it
you can still be a vile and corrupt individual whether or not there's a system of government in place
while I understand that his point was poorly written and he needs to expand upon it, using the opposite extreme in order to validate your own stance is ust silly[/QUOTE]
i was highlighting how simplistic his point was
if its freedom of individuals that is to blame for corruption and evil then neither would exist in a society that grants none of the former
otherwise the statement is completely false
Anarchy simply cant work because without anything to keep people on the right track and from doing crimes and such, it will simply be at the very least very hard to live because not only is there nothing being provided to you, even if you do get something your probably going to end up losing it a day later because of theieves or some other problem. Theres also serious issues to consider that would make living even harder, such as no healthcare or road maintenance or anything, not to mention the lack of Clean water. Its just an Miniature Apocalypse if Anarchy somehow managed to exist.
It just cant work without turning into a total and utter disaster.
(Also, Eternek is dumbing the thread for some reason)
[QUOTE=thisispain;40150352]i was highlighting how simplistic his point was
if its freedom of individuals that is to blame for corruption and evil then neither would exist in a society that grants none of the former
otherwise the statement is completely false[/QUOTE]
that makes more sense. freedom and its affect on human nature is a gray area. because of that, it really depends on one's opinion of how humans are that dictates whether or not anarchy would work.
[QUOTE=calebc789;40150396]Anarchy simply cant work because without anything to keep people on the right track and from doing crimes and such, it will simply be at the very least very hard to live because not only is there nothing being provided to you, even if you do get something your probably going to end up losing it a day later because of theieves or some other problem.[/QUOTE]
the idea ends up being that you defend your own homestead. people can be career criminals now, it's just that there's a system in place to take care of them. in a stateless society, you take it upon yourself to deal with a problem. if someone tries to steal your shit, you defend it in whatever means you have. a lack of order does not immediately lead to an increased crime rate in the long run. a sudden transition into anarchy is a different story, but if there was a society where anarchy formed naturally over time in an already civilized area? it wouldn't be as problematic as you might think.
everyone assumes anarchy would be violent as fuck with no order and what not, ya'll watch too many movies.
people could still work together and protect each other from others. I have your back if you have mine and all that jazz
doubt it would last long though