» Home » Politics
Anarchy Is Acceptable Under Certain Conditions
When is a good time for anarchy in any country? Should it be a method of restoring a country or should it never be an option? Are you For or Against Anarchy? I have no idea why but for some reason someone keeps changing the name of this debate.
 Jayce  20 Sep 2008 05:43
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
Think of it as the reset button. It's never your first choice but sometimes it's your only choice.
 
 finsch  20 Sep 2008 21:45
 2 Comments
 
 you have summed it up nicely.
by  Scorpion
 20 Sep 2008 22:00
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Anarchy is inevitable, and even necessary.
A little revolution now and again is a good thing, so said a famous man, and it is true.

When? The government has become so oppressive, crushing....as in the days when the first revolution was also necessary....so it is again. That is the right time for another.

For those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

It is time...to repeat it. Anarchy, here we come.
 
 Scorpion  20 Sep 2008 07:11
 4 Comments
 
 I agree that it is time for a revolt but revolt is not anarchy. A concerted revolution will be organized but anarchy is never organized and always doomed to long-term failure, whereas an agreed upon and structure revolution can be successful and benefit all in the long run.
by  TMBerman
 20 Sep 2008 08:58
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Anarchy is bs. Definitely against it.

Anarchy (n.) Absence of any form of political authority.
Anarchy (n.) Political disorder and confusion.
Anarchy (n.) Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

Does that sound like a good freaking government to you? I don't know. Why don't you decide for yourselves. Political confusion vs. Democracy,,,,hmmm...I wonder...
 
 Yodec  20 Sep 2008 18:01
 3 Comments
 
 Anarchy is also what Freedom Fighters use to fight their oppressors, as in the American Revolutionary War against the British, for example.
by  grokit
 20 Sep 2008 18:12
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
If you're against anarchy, does that mean you're also against unregulated business practices that made the economic mess possible. Predatory lending with no rules or laws is one of the worst examples of anarchy in history.

Or were you referring to anarchy such as the 1960s civil rights marchers who protested against segregated schools?
 
 K9  20 Sep 2008 14:34
 1 Comment
 
 Probably more of the fact of uprising against any higher government or source of power. In theory it is the absence of the "state" or any other higher source of power who "govern" the people. With anarchy comes a functional society of the people, with a common set of morals and ethics that are all known in the society without any sort of ruler or governing authority. However for this debate I should have included more information on the theory of Anarchism, but the theory of Anarchy works as well. But economics does play into that matter because with anarchy leads to a common free market, yet some also include capitalism for an Anarchist economy. This also includes the right of private property and anarcho-capitalism which would be the effect of an Anarchist government. Simply put the anarchy I have mentioned is the Anarchy relating to the rejection of the state or any higher authority in a civilized and governed community.
by  Jayce
 20 Sep 2008 16:52
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
100% against it. Anarchy is simply a bunch of self-serving idiots whose goal is self service otherwise it would be a concerted effort with structure, which is the only truly effective way to accomplish anything; let alone anything worthwhile.

There is a big difference between anarchy and revolution. If we look at our nations history, there was no widespread anarchy, but there was most definitely a consensus to organize and revolt in an honorable manner, and this with MUCH forethought.
 
 TMBerman  20 Sep 2008 08:56
 4 Comments
 
 Anarchy is not necessarily the absence of structure and organisation. In an anarchy it is possible to have rules (laws); however, these must be agreed upon by the participants in the system, and not imposed from above by a ruler (leader, authority).
by  Kirsty08
 20 Sep 2008 09:23
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
Palin Cost McCain The Election
Christians Who Support War And Claim To Live By The Bible Are Lying.
ForandAgainst.com Is Playing Big Brother.
Barrack Obama Is A Speaker Not A Leader.
McCain Is A Manchurian Candidate.
Capitalism Is Perfect.
Europe Should Not Support Kosovo’s Independence.
Felons Should Retain The Right To Vote
We Are Doomed To Fail, Just Like Egypt, Rome, And Every Other Great Empire
People Can't Trust Cable News
New Debates
S Club 7 Is Garbage Forever!
The World Is One Big Lie!
Real Madrid Has Got A Lot Of Potential Players
Hockey Is Better Than Ice Hockey.
Michael Savage's Opinions Is Agreeabl
Republicans Are As Responsible For Big Government As Anyone Else.
Cigarettes Should Be Illegal
Tobacco Companies Should Be Required To List ALL The Ingredients In Their Products.
Ads On T.V. Really Don't Say The Truth
All Clothing Including Skirts And Dresses Should Be For Both Men And Women. A Suit, For A Man Or Woman,...