My Case for Anarchy

[Anarchist]

Hey forumers, this is my first time posting on these forums so I would like to introduce myself. As you could tell by my username i am an anarchist. I believe that government is unnecessary for a peaceful and prosperous society to exist due to certain moral principles. I enjoy playing guitar and computer programming and I'm on the pursuit of personal growth.

Before I present my case we need to clarify what anarchy is not.

Anarchy does not imply chaos.
Anarchy is not Arnold Schwarzenegger riding naked on a motorcycle smashing everyone's face into buildings.(Though that would be really cool)

Anarchy literally means "no ruler" or no government.

Anarchy does imply freedom, no police, no government officials, all property is private, no regulations, ect.

Now you would probably say , "How can a society survive without government ? Who would regulate all the criminals that run a muck in the streets?"

Before we address this statement , let's look at some of the most fundamental moral principles that operate in society and human behavior.

1. Non-Aggression Principle

The non-aggression principle states that it is morally wrong to initiate(start) force against another human being such as : murder, rape, assault, theft, threatening violence against the victim in order to achieve a goal, ect.

You may use force in self-defense against a person that violates the non-aggression principle.

2.Property Rights

In Property Rights ,you own effects of your actions such as : houses ,cars, money,food,water,businesses, your life, ect.(Except other human beings of course). Basically you are 100% responsible for your life and the stuff you own.

Now the obvious question is, "Who is going uphold these fundamental moral principles?".Your first thought might be "government", but there is a flaw in that logic, let me explain. Government is described as a group of people having a monopoly on force in an area such as countries ,states, cities ect. You may ask, "How does it have a monopoly on force"? Well,Government is the only entity that has the right(supposedly) to initiate force on another human being, thus violating the non-aggression principle. It is also the only entity that has the supposed "moral" obligation to violate property rights. You may ask "How?". Well do you pay taxes on property? If so, why? You may say "That's the law and if I don't pay my taxes i could go to jail. And if I resist or try to run away they could shoot me or worse , kill me!!!". Well , doesn't that violate the non-aggression and property rights? You may say"Well, but what about the criminals ravage in the streets? Who's going to get rid of them?" Well why can't you or your friends get rid of them , why do we need an agency that violates these principles to get rid of people that violate the same principles the agency violates? Hypocrisy much?

I'm not saying that all people that work in government are evil and corrupt human beings. Some certainly are but most are not. Most genuinely believe that they are helping the community and some are, but why do we need to initiate force against other human beings? Why do we have laws? Aren't laws just pieces of paper that say "Do this or else"?

Reasons why Anarchy is not accepted by most people:

Fear of death and destruction
Fear of government
Fear of taking 100% responsiblity for their lives.

Can Anarchy Work?

Anarchy can only work if people remove the fear of what true freedom can bring them?

Im not saying anarchy is a perfect system, just a morally right one.

Please feel free to leave your comments and opinions on anarchy.

If you have any criticisms of anarchy please feel free to reply, i'll gladly respond when i can.

Many of my points come from Freedomain Radio ? The Home Page so if you like to check them out please feel free to do so.

Edit: Just clear things things up in a statement i have made about "you and your friends getting rid of the criminal" it was to make a point on consistency of initiating force on others, meaning, "why let other people do it when you can do it yourself", it is not advocating initiating force on the criminal. Sorry for the lack of clarity.