Quote:
You guys still do not understand anarchy.
Anarchy would not be pure chaos, or "bedlam" as Shamou put it.
It merely means there would be an absence of a monopoly on force. People could choose whatever system they wanted to live in.
|
How do you know what it would be like?
You can look at history, and find that their are no stable anarchies that have survied.
The problems begins when people choose different systems that can't coexist.
Some people might think that the risks that genmaniputed plants bear are worth the advantages they provide.
Other people might think that the risk that genmaniputed plants could destroy our ecosystem might be greater than the advantages.
You need some process to decide that dispute.
Burning fossil fuels is a similar example.
In our globalised world you need someone who has the power to make rules over such issues.
The 21st century will be an age where the risks of such actions could kill everyone on this planet.
States are better equiped to deal with those problems than individual citizins.
Another issue is that corporations tend to merge and built even larger corporations. You need a state to prevent those corporations from acquiring monopols.
The mafia is a very profitable business when thier isn't a state that makes it difficult for the mafia to operate.
Different mafia clans would battle each other till one mafia clan would rule like a goverment.
You need your goverment to prevent corporations and the mafia from getting a certain amount of power.
Even when you belief that power is evil, it is better to have a system with checks and balances, than having a system with no force that stops a mafia clan or a big corporation to gaining to much power.
If their the mafia clan or the corporation gets a certain amount of power it will be a goverment in itself.
In addition when different mafia clans and corporations compete in armed combat people who aren't involed suffer too.