What Is Your Problem With Anarchy?

People are only as good as the world allows them to be. So, in Anarchy, where are the limitations such as state rules preventing certain kids from getting scholarships yet giving away free school to those with darker skin tone or the inability for many to get a job because outsourcing is easier and cheaper? You say that people will be greedy. I say GOOD! The more greedy people are, the more they will have to strive to achieve and the more benefit they will give to the world. Imagine, if you will, all information is open-source, all materials available. You can do anything so long as you have the determination and will power, with no government regulations to stop you. What most people fail to see is that human qualities such as greed and lust become beneficial in a society where you can do anything you want. These attributes of the human condition serve to increase human capability. We view them as bad now because we have no proper way of dealing with them.

I for one would not could not live in a society where the least is not treated as an equal..

People are only as good as the world allows them to be. So, in Anarchy, where are the limitations such as state rules preventing certain kids from getting scholarships yet giving away free school to those with darker skin tone or the inability for many to get a job because outsourcing is easier and cheaper? You say that people will be greedy. I say GOOD! The more greedy people are, the more they will have to strive to achieve and the more benefit they will give to the world. Imagine, if you will, all information is open-source, all materials available. You can do anything so long as you have the determination and will power, with no government regulations to stop you. What most people fail to see is that human qualities such as greed and lust become beneficial in a society where you can do anything you want. These attributes of the human condition serve to increase human capability. We view them as bad now because we have no proper way of dealing with them.

If humans are only animals for reproduction then we should go back to the anarchistic nature of... well... nature.

all groups that restrict members in any way are removed, people will still band together into new restrictive groups.

Take unions for example, a better display of natural seeking of government i cannot find, people banded together, elected leaders, not because of tradition or following a crowd, or outside pressure, but for protection from their fellow humans,

Your words betray you. You cannot even make them treat all as equals.

my words describe me they dont betray me...make make...the majority in a decent society would not need making ..just by recognising the least is a massive step for a society.

They do describe you, and that is why they betray you.

You both deny equality and affirm it. You say we should treat the least as equals. Your words show you accept that there is natural inequality, and only added inequality can be used to level it.

It is not possible to treat the least as equals.

Which is why, in anarchy, the least have the chance to become equal but must do so on their own power. "No special programs or government controlled resources dedicated to giving money to those who refuse to provide for themselves.

I think that the hardest part about explaining Anarchy is that people refuse to step out of what they know to consider new possibilities. Imagine waking up one morining and being told that you were now fully responsible for your life. No government would help, no organization would guarantee your life style, no police to promise security. All you had was you. You had to make your way through life and you had to do so with 7.62 billion others who were stuck doing the same thing. You were stuck dealing solely with the consequences of your actions.

Would you really want to kill? Would you really want to freak out and break all of the rules you had known? I know I wouldn't. First thing I would figure out is how to eat. Second, where to stay. Third, how to continue both of these. I would do what it took to survive and thrive. It's that simple.

They do describe you, and that is why they betray you.

You both deny equality and affirm it. You say we should treat the least as equals. Your words show you accept that there is natural inequality, and only added inequality can be used to level it.

It is not possible to treat the least as equals.

All I can tell from reading through this discussion is that people are not understanding the idea of absence. Nothingness. To me, anarchy (absence of rule) means more than no 'established government,' for lack of a better term. It means the total and complete absence of rule, coercion, establishment, and authority.
Anarchy is not a political belief. It is a natural phenomenon. It is something that occurs when authority ceases to exist among people.

An anarchist is someone who understands that authority is an idea, and does not exist outside of the mind. There is nothing inherently different about a police officer that gives him the right to stop me from doing anything. Regardless of what the 6.72 (not 7.62, Icon ) billion other people in the world say, my understanding of this idea is the quality the defines me as an anarchist. My rejection of the idea of authority.

Convince me if you can that the weak will survive?

Anyone who chooses to live free and independent of society and government is not weak. I am not suggesting that anarchism should be applied to any country, region, or people. I am only suggesting that individuals should consider anarchism for their own lives.

Sorry but your words mark you out...there is a natural inequality in ability by nature but more so by nurture..your intentions would be to maintain that inequality mine would narrow that quality.We should treat each as equals ,my morals say that there goes i save for chance..

You are woefully oblivious to my intentions.

So an anarchist living in a democracy is what? and is he inside or outside of society as we understand society??Its only for the brave those who are weak live in a democracy??:perplexed:

So how would your anarchy treat the least?