Why are people so affraid of anarchy?

[Amarok]

And what, exactly, keeps that company from taking money from the both of you and not answering the phone?


I'm sure that will result in voluntary handouts surpassing the obligations we now face as citizens. No doubt the generosity of human spirit  will fund not only police enforcing non-existent laws (because remember, we're talking about no government, no legislature, no laws), but will also help to pay for roads, firehouses, ambulances, and so on.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. A "dispute resolution organization" could just as easily be a scam and you'd be none the wiser, taking your money and moving on. Explain why this is a different organization than, you know, a government. At least with a government, I've got firefighters willing to put their asses on the line to save my son or wife.

I'm of the opinion that so-called "anarchists" are folks who like what they have and want more, but don't understand that there ain't any free ride.

Yeh there's lots of questions to be asked.  But if we pretend we were starting a society from scratch you can ask the same question about a government.  America has a stable government, relatively speaking.  But you have situations in places with a less stable government where they do just take off with citizens money.

You could say ok so why should we trust a government? Even when talking about America, why should we trust a government?  They have a history of genocide, colonization, enslavement.  What if we give all our tax dollars to a government leader and they decide to take off, they decide to use the money on wars that make no sense, they decide to bomb the worlds poorest countries, they decide to use intelligence agencies to fund future terrorists.

That's not to say I think anarchy is a cure for this, I can't answer every "what if" question there is in relation to anarchy or a government.  I'm pretty happy living under a government that's all I know.

What I disagree with is the insistence there can be no laws in anarchy, and no one would pay for firemen or soldiers.  I think the system might be worse, possibly, but it's not impossible that law systems or that some sort of emergency service couldn't exist.

I agree with most of this as I said i'm not an anarchist myself . I just think after ACTUALLY reading what they have to say before dismissing it as impossible. Just like I have Conservatives ,Liberals ,Communists, Socalists ,libertarian s And even Facists. I can't have a clear opinion about them until I understand them.

---

OP - government sucks and is tyrannical, anarchy is so much better
Me - except me and millions like me rely on the government to live, literally, so removing government will likely kill me/them given the depth and breadth of the care required on a large scale
You - well, not necessarily... some vague references to communal support Then putting up a least a dozen links
Me - how would that work? Actual details, not vague assertions (provided )
You - you're starting to sound like a theist because just like a theist you insist without a theistic system morality there can be no morality .
Me - WTF?

I care not about the anarchist's philosophy. Philosophy won't provide me my Metformin. I want the actual nuts and bolts

Social programs are not  based on  political philosophy ?

Put another way: if anarchism isn't lawlessness, then what is it? And if, politically, it has a different definition than the lay-person's understanding of it, then it has a serious branding issue and should make strides to fix it.

Already provided links . Anymore so then Atheism .