|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| However, Anarchy is not as dangerous as many proclaim. In a sustainable state of Anarchy the world would reach pinnacles higher than it has ever achieved before. There would be no poverty, no wars, and ultimate freedom of the individual. With no government there would be no money. This would mean that the only things that had any value would be actual useful objects. Hording more than you need would have no value as it wouldn't help to have extra things. Hence no one would keep what they don't need, and others could have it. Given that the world can easily out produce it's needs with so much extra stuff that wouldn't require buying poverty would all but dissapear. Without a government to wage war there can be no war. That is slightly simplistic and doesn't work in reality. However, many wars are fought over land rights, and property rights that only affect a few. Any disputes over such things would be settled by individuals, not warring nations. Also any such dispute would be rare, given that ownership is no longer an important aspect of society. The ultimate freedom of the individual means that nothing could stop you from doing what you want to do. If you wanted to be a doctor someone would teach you, if you wanted to be an artist there is no downside to never making money, as there is no money. Granted, this leads to the question "what if someone wants to be a serial killer". The simple answer to this is that law is not a deterent to criminals. People who kill others don't think to stop because it's against the law. Any such people would be put to justice by the other people around them for such things. All of this so far assumes one very important detail...people. It assumes that people are good enough that they will be cooperative with each other to survive. The theory of Anarchy is based on trust of the human race. Without a human race worth of that trust Anarchy is an impossibility. |