(June 23, 2015 at 1:17 pm)Napoléon Wrote: Anarchism has always struck me as a rather naive and childish world view.
Maybe that is because it is. To make sure we do not get lost in something else:
Quote:anarchy
noun
[MASS NOUN]
1A state of disorder due to absence or non-recognitionof authority or other controlling systems:he must ensure public order in a country threatened with anarchy
2Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini...ctCode=all
The British philosopher Thomas Hobbes called this a "state of nature," a theoretical situation in which:
"the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short."
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3207/3207-h/3207-h.htm
Of course, it is an imaginary state of existence, as there will always be those who will exercise their power in a void. What always happens in the absence of government is various peoples grouping together, with different groups opposed to each other, in a brutal struggle to obtain power (i.e., to make their own government).
Anyone who advocates for such a state is an idiot. All anarchists are fucking stupid morons. And yes, there are silly, naive children who imagine that they don't have to go to bed on time or do anything their parents say, which is appealing to them. But in the absence of a social order, there is chaos and extreme violence, until there is a new social order in place.
No one of sense is an anarchist. And no one of sense takes the ravings of anarchists seriously.
And as you, TaraJo, have noticed, self-described "anarchists" are often hypocritical assholes who really want to be dictating laws themselves. And, TaraJo, all anarchists are idiots. Just think carefully about what "anarchy" really is, and you will see that only an idiot would advocate such a thing.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
