No, true anarchy can't work. With no-one in authority, you can't have laws. After all what good is a law if there is no-one to enforce it? If you don't have laws, then the strongest will just take what they want. If someone wants your house, they just walk in and take it, what are you going to do? Well, with no police, judges, etc, you either fight or leave assuming they don't just kill you. Soon, of course, the strong will make rules and use whatever means they have to enforce them, and thus anarchy would die as there would be someone in authority.
Reply to this opinion
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Discussion (4)
::unhide-discussion::
I upvoted your comment because it exposes a flaw within the ideology of anarchy: namely that the end of anarchy is created when authority is reclaimed by force. So it might be a matter of time before anarchy ends.
However, I disagree with the idea that "the strongest will just take away what they want". It reduces the anarchistic situation to a case of "survival of the fittest", where "fittest" implies physical fitness instead of adaptive capabilities (which is what fittest actually means).
Also while I share the acknowledgement of the potential violent nature within human behavior as a constant factor, you seem to have a bit of a pessimistic view. Are you saying that the existence of authority is a natural occurance within society, inherited by the "strong"?
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
"where "fittest" implies physical fitness instead of adaptive capabilities (which is what fittest actually means).,"
But unless they can protect their goods the strong will just take it way. So they would have to be physical fit, and probably inclined to violence as well.
"Are you saying that the existence of authority is a natural occurance within society, inherited by the "strong"?"
Well we don't have anarchy, but in our society, the strong isn't just those people who are physically strong, but also those who buy the strength of their personally able to convince people to follow them. We've seen that though out history, in both good and bad.
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0 votes,
Oct 2, 2016
"But unless they can protect their goods the strong will just take it way."
They (the strong) would, if it were a scarcity society, even when governed. But I see your point.
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
Even in our non anarchy society when there isn't any real scarcity, we see the "strong" taking from the weak. By strong I mean basically those who are either physically strong or are will to be violent, how much worse would it be if there weren't laws?
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
@
click for template
OR
Share it:
Share this opinion via OpiWiki smartlink:
OR
Opinion's page
Click the @ to see full topic's discussion.
Status:
Active
Replies:
4
Main replies:
1
subscribe
For new main reply notification
Voting
(9 votes)