In Europe, Anarchy is back in style

[MessiahDecoy123]

No, the purpose of anarchy is the destruction of government - not the destruction of leadership.

Actually the purpose of anarchy is self-ownership for the individual. That means no leaders. Everyone rules themselves.

 

[chaseter]

HAHA that scene from Spider-Man 1 where the board fires Norman fits right in.

 

[BlackLantern]

Actually the purpose of anarchy is self-ownership for the individual. That means no leaders. Everyone rules themselves.

but someone always wants more, wants power

 

[Dr. Evil]

but someone always wants more, wants power

And this person happens to be that Someone:

 

[BlackLantern]

Putin gets what Putin wants

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

You can see his brain pulsating through his skull.

 

[BlackLantern]

that's the awesome fighting to get out

 

[StorminNorman]

Philosophy asks questions to find answers. Religion claims to have answers to all questions. Atheism is no longer a lack of a belief in religion, it has become an organized anti-religion. It is the Bizarro to Superman.

Thus anarchists have become organized and structured to fight the exact same things they have become. I would even bet these anarchist groups have leadership.

I like this answer.

Yeah, put all our lives in the hands of private corporations without the power to vote abusive/corrupt/misguided leaders out of power.

Genius idea.

That's what I don't understand about fiscal libertarians, so willing to trade government power for corporate masters. At least the average person can influence government by voting. What are you going to do when corporate leaders do something you don't like? Vote them out without being on the board of trustees? Good luck with that.

I hate Tyson chicken. They do business with Iran and I believe that to be an absolutely irresponsible business policy. I never have to buy Tyson chicken.

Many people hate Wal-Mart. I think this is silly (I regard Wal-Mart as being significantly more positive for the poor than any government program), but those individuals are able to live their lives wonderful without the aid of that store (I avoid Wal-Mart as much as possible simply due to the fact ours is a jungle).

Actually the purpose of anarchy is self-ownership for the individual. That means no leaders. Everyone rules themselves.

Many people own property and follow leaders. It's a regular occurrence.

 

[Matt]

And this person happens to be that Someone:

If anarchy will lead to a situation where Putin grabs world wide power much like the Emperor in Star Wars, then I think that I could deal with a little bit of it.

 

[WildcatNC]

Yeah, put all our lives in the hands of private corporations without the power to vote abusive/corrupt/misguided leaders out of power.

Genius idea.

That's what I don't understand about fiscal libertarians, so willing to trade government power for corporate masters. At least the average person can influence government by voting. What are you going to do when corporate leaders do something you don't like? Vote them out without being on the board of trustees? Good luck with that.

If I HAD to have a label I would consider myself a moderate Libertarian. I agree with you. The market is a powerful mechanism indeed, but its all about checks and balances.

I think its madness to remove all regulation and let the corporations run things. Government can never stay out of economics because economics will NEVER stay out of government. Remove enough regulation and they will just start taking over the government (kind of like now).

 

[Gamma Ray]

Europe will be under Sharia law soon enough.

 

[LOBO3315a]

Ararchists ignore the fact that humans are tribal in nature. We tend to follow the one that is percieved to be stronger and successful. By that, we hope to be as strong and as successful. Change that, and you change the very essence of what it is to be a human being.

 

[BlackLantern]

agreed, Lobo....again the system seems good in theory, its the human element that ***** it all up

 

[Paradoxium]

It depends which subset of Anarchists we are talking about, it makes a world of a difference. Can't say I am fan of the anarcho-commies. I also doubt there is many anarcho-capitalists in the Italian and Greek regions. Or maybe its just the media being who the just calling them that.

 

[Paradoxium]

Yeah, put all our lives in the hands of private corporations without the power to vote abusive/corrupt/misguided leaders out of power.

Genius idea.

That's what I don't understand about fiscal libertarians, so willing to trade government power for corporate masters. At least the average person can influence government by voting. What are you going to do when corporate leaders do something you don't like? Vote them out without being on the board of trustees? Good luck with that.

Yea, when pigs fly out of my ass to the green jelly bean moons of Jupiter. They both can be abusive and corrupt, the difference is, when one goes down (inevitably) they bring far more people down. The government goes down, they bring the entire population to the knees.

There is so much problems with de-facto democracy I don't know where to begin. For starters, notice how the United States originally fashioned itself a constitutional republic.

Really the biggest problem for government, mixed or private market - a near universal norm - is the asymmetry of information.