we live in a state of anarchy
Written by jeremy hammond on Monday, 7/8/2002
... it's just that we've convinced ourselves that we don't.Think about it.
Let's say every government in the entire world collapsed. Complete anarchy. Eventually, small groups would form in an attempt to work together and defend themselves from the violent mobs. At first, there'd be thousands of these groups distributed throughout the world... but as time passed, the number would grow fewer and fewer as these groups grow. There would be fights over control over land. Eventually, these groups would grow so large that there'd have to be a system of rules to ensure maximum efficiency. The people living in areas under control by a certain group would be subjected to the rules of the group. Control ultimately goes to who's holding the biggest gun. And while there is no official system of rules, if someone does something that the controlling group has issues with, you'd be dealt with. These groups would become goverments, and their regions would become nations. But there'd still be anarchy.
Essentially, we live in anarchy... right this very minute. It's just that there are a bunch of guys running around telling people how to live, and if they don't follow the rules, they get punished. Control goes to whoever's holding the biggest guns.
But still.. there aren't any rules, there are only false imaginary rules. You can't kill people.. but you can. You're still pysically able to. You can't use drugs, but you're still physically able to. There are no restrictions in this world, there are only differences in opinion, differences in how people think the world should be run. The U.S. Government is only one idea of the way things should be run. It doesn't mean it's the right way. It's only temporary.
Do your own thing, and don't listen to how they want you to live.
posted by Cheeses Crust on Monday, 7/8/2002:
Rules are to protected the stupid people incapable of surviving on their own. I mean come on, look at the packages for airline peanuts. It says, "Caution: Peanuts." Look at jay-walking too. You know when it's safe to cross, but some idiot might not and somehow get his guts splattered on a suburban utility vehicle.
What's funnier about all these rules for the dumb, is that clever(I use that term loosely in this case) people exploit them to get money. They act dumb, get a big pay off which is followed by more rules. In the long run this is making the USA look like a bunch of retards. Perhaps that's what we've become. We forget that our government represents us, and not the other way 'round. We refuse to acknowledge that and follow our "leaders" blindly.
posted by malcolmmasher on Tuesday, 7/9/2002:
We do not live in anarchy. Like you said, humanity once existed in a state of anarchy, from which governments formed. That means that the anarchy was replaced by the government, not just pushed out of the limelight. Anarchy is the lack of a government. Ergo, when governments formed, anarchy disappeared. The U.S. is not in anarchy, because it has a government. Second, American government does not depend on who has the biggest gun. Usually, it depends on who has the biggest pocketbook. Not really a huge improvement, but less violent. Finally, though laws do not physically prevent actions, they're still laws, and the punishments for breaking laws are still restrictions- whether they physically prevent an act or not.
posted by Smartyr on Tuesday, 7/9/2002:
I have to disagree with malcom because If we did try to go back to anarchy it would fail. period. Someo one would put themself in power and appoint his buddies to help out. I think the other half of the point here is from my oldest article, man and society are inseperable. There's no way that true anarchy could exist because there will always be one greed asshole who will take power. so I guess jeremy's point is, and correct me if I'm wrong, but if anarchy was instituted a few years donw the line things would be exactly the same
posted by malcolmmasher on Wednesday, 7/10/2002:
What did I say about being able to return to anarchy? We can't, for the exact reasons you said. Somebody will try to take power. I was only saying that we don't live in anarchy, not that we can return to it.
posted by Cheeses Crust on Thursday, 7/11/2002:
Anarchy does exist in some forms. Somalia's a fairly good example. They still fight to the death in the streets. It may not be the literal translation of anarchy (no government), but nobody tells anyone what they should/shouldn't do. The governing force is impotent.
One more thing, mental boundries can be harder to cross than physical ones. You may want to kill someone, you have the power to, but you might have too many inner conflicts to carry out the deed. The mind is a powerful thing. Physical capacity for an act doesn't mean it can be accomplished.
posted by dave on Friday, 7/12/2002:
very very true, if it wasn't for a group of guys with some threat that they had, in this case the justice system people would just do what they want. In anarchy I think people would eventually find a way to cooperate without killing each other, thats just the way it will be, remember our dna is encoded to procreate and establish it self as a species that stays alive throught whatever
posted by malcolmmasher on Monday, 7/29/2002:
When you say that people would just do what they want, remember that some people want to hurt other people. You would get predators along with your cooperative groups, bandits as well as farmers. Eventually a government would form, for greater capability.
posted by Jeremy Hammond on Wednesday, 1/15/2003:
What I'm trying to say is that we don't live under any power or authority, we live under the illusion of power and authority.
posted by ACNEPUNK on Monday, 6/2/2003:
I THINK ANARCHY IS PRETTY DUMG I MEAN THINK ABOUT IT THESE SO CALLED ANARCHISTS WANT PEACE BUT IN ANARCHY YOU CAN KILL ANYONE YOU WANT WORSE THEN TODAY CAPITALISM SUCKS I KNOW THE WAY GOVERNMENT AND AMERICA IS RUN NOW SUCKS BUT ANARCHY WOULDNT SOLVE NOTHING THE WORLD WOULD HAVE TO BE PERFECT FOR ANARCHY TO REIGN