Quantcast

Would you rather live in a socialist state or in total anarchy, if you absolutely had to choose...?

SeaSparkzz 2010/07/26 22:06:01
Related Topics: Obama
Anarchy
Socialist State
You!
Add Photos & Videos
In this hypothetical question it is one or the other. Please explain your answer.
Do NOT bring up Obama or America... This is HYPOTHETICAL, lets keep it that way.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • soday 2010/07/28 00:25:28
    Socialist State
    soday
    +6
    Talk about anarchy being a blissful state of pure harmony is wonderful, just as Marx's writings made communism sound wonderful. In theory, both extremes provide wonders aplenty. The reality is quite different. Ask people who live in Somalia how they feel about anarchy. The absence of a state does not lead to the flourishing of our better natures. It leads to opportunism and rule of the gun. At least in a socialist state there are laws, and a structure, no matter how flawed, for keeping the most rapacious from taking everything they want from the weak. A socialist state can also, as history has shown, lead to an educated populace that demands a better form of government.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • La 2010/08/05 04:50:02
    Socialist State
    La
    +1
    I don't think I'd fare too well in complete anarchy. Probably end up dead pretty soon.
  • Ken 2010/07/30 04:07:31
    Anarchy
    Ken
    +1
    I'll fight to the death before either of these happen.
  • mac -Holding Fast 2010/07/28 19:01:57
    Anarchy
    mac -Holding Fast
    +1
    Self preservation would rule.

    And anarchy always leads to some form of order.

    I would only hope to be an agent of the new form of order to arise.
  • Johnny Angel 2010/07/28 08:15:23
    Socialist State
    Johnny Angel
    +2
    I don't wanna kill people for food and blankets.
  • Master 2010/07/28 06:15:04
    Anarchy
    Master
    +1
    There's "good" anarchy and "bad" anarchy. The best anarchy is where laws and police aren't necessary because everyone is naturally good to each other. In reality I would never expect to see such an Utopian society, so I would rather live in a socialist state than in the "bad" anarchy where everyone does whatever evil acts they want because they don't fear punishment.
  • Icedragon1969 2010/07/28 02:34:52
    Anarchy
    Icedragon1969
    +2
    At least I could defend myself against the people wanting to tell me what I should be doing.
  • soday 2010/07/28 00:25:28
    Socialist State
    soday
    +6
    Talk about anarchy being a blissful state of pure harmony is wonderful, just as Marx's writings made communism sound wonderful. In theory, both extremes provide wonders aplenty. The reality is quite different. Ask people who live in Somalia how they feel about anarchy. The absence of a state does not lead to the flourishing of our better natures. It leads to opportunism and rule of the gun. At least in a socialist state there are laws, and a structure, no matter how flawed, for keeping the most rapacious from taking everything they want from the weak. A socialist state can also, as history has shown, lead to an educated populace that demands a better form of government.
  • disinter soday 2010/07/28 00:50:14
  • informednotgullible 2010/07/28 00:04:02
    Anarchy
    informednotgullible
    +1
    ACTUALLY.......MONARCHY!
  • SeaSparkzz informe... 2010/07/28 00:12:40
    SeaSparkzz
    +1
    Why can't you just answer the question as it is? Why answer if you aren't going to actually choose one of the options?
  • informe... SeaSparkzz 2010/07/28 00:16:18
    informednotgullible
    Because neither work for me...sorry control freak...I will bow out!
  • Blix informe... 2010/07/29 09:03:42
    Blix
    With William as King!!!!! Glorious
  • informe... Blix 2010/07/29 20:27:03
    informednotgullible
    My Monarch is Jesus Christ and He WILL reign....but not until everyone who rejects Him amost kills themselves and the whole world.
  • SeaSparkzz informe... 2010/07/29 21:56:46
    SeaSparkzz
    +1
    good luck with that.
  • informe... SeaSparkzz 2010/07/30 03:38:20
    informednotgullible
    no luck about it...IT IS going to happen but not until Damascus is destroyed, there is a world currency, world government, world religion and world leader WHO will make a 7 yr treaty with Israel and 3 1/2 yrs after that WATCH OUT! All HELL is going to brake loose on this planet. One quarter of the earth's population will be killed. The temple will be rebuilt in Israel and that world leader I mentioned....well he is going to go inside the temple and claim to BE God. If you do NOT worship him he will have you killed. I do not plan on being here when he shows up...but I will be coming back with Christ when He returns to stop all the evil the people were so willing to follow.
  • La informe... 2010/08/05 04:52:10
    La
    +1
    put the crack pipe down... :)
  • diaverde08-AmericanKilljoy 2010/07/27 23:21:38
    Anarchy
    diaverde08-AmericanKilljoy
    +1
    Pacifist-Capitalism.
  • SeaSparkzz diaverd... 2010/07/28 00:12:37
    SeaSparkzz
    Why can't you just answer the question as it is? Why answer if you aren't going to actually choose one of the options?
  • diaverd... SeaSparkzz 2010/07/28 00:41:14
    diaverde08-AmericanKilljoy
    There are at least 5 different variations of what people consider to be anarchy, so I'll choose what ever I prefer.

    5 variations people anarchy ill choose
  • Casey 2010/07/27 23:01:16
    Socialist State
    Casey
    After seeing and doing look up info Capitalism I find out the country have more jobs people that are happy and has A say so on how and what they do for work if you have no seen Michael Moore Capitalism A Love Story you need to see it!
  • La Casey 2010/08/05 04:53:31
  • WankerBait 2010/07/27 15:58:15
    Socialist State
    WankerBait
    A Democratic-Socialist state, or if you rather, maybe "social Anarchism".

    Individual Anarchism would ultimately lead to either a Dictatorship or an Oligarchy over time...
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/27 18:49:56
    disinter
    For most people, "anarchy" is a disturbing word, suggesting chaos, violence, antinomianism – things they hope the state can control or prevent. The term "state," despite its bloody history, doesn't disturb them. Yet it's the state that is truly chaotic, because it means the rule of the strong and cunning. They imagine that anarchy would naturally terminate in the rule of thugs. But mere thugs can't assert a plausible right to rule. Only the state, with its propaganda apparatus, can do that. This is what "legitimacy" means. Anarchists obviously need a more seductive label.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/or...
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/28 14:39:01
    WankerBait
    Anarchism and Libertarianism are both utopian ideals of human nature that cannot practically work. A civil society without laws, regulation, and/or governance is not possible and government will always be implemented - either through force or through consensus...
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/28 14:50:57
    disinter
    I am often asked if anarchy has ever existed in our world, to which I answer: almost all of your daily behavior is an anarchistic expression. How you deal with your neighbors, coworkers, fellow customers in shopping malls or grocery stores, is often determined by subtle processes of negotiation and cooperation. Social pressures, unrelated to statutory enactments, influence our behavior on crowded freeways or grocery checkout lines. If we dealt with our colleagues at work in the same coercive and threatening manner by which the state insists on dealing with us, our employment would be immediately terminated. We would soon be without friends were we to demand that they adhere to specific behavioral standards that we had mandated for their lives.

    Should you come over to our home for a visit, you will not be taxed, searched, required to show a passport or driver’s license, fined, jailed, threatened, handcuffed, or prohibited from leaving. I suspect that your relationships with your friends are conducted on the same basis of mutual respect. In short, virtually all of our dealings with friends and strangers alike are grounded in practices that are peaceful, voluntary, and devoid of coercion.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/sh...
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/28 19:00:30
    WankerBait
    +1
    As I said, an utopian ideal. It's not necessarily about how individuals will treat their friends or acquaintances, but rather how capitalists, corporations, organized groups and the powerful will treat others. It's about how civil unrest/disobedience is attended to and resolved without gangs and turf wars.

    Conflating individual behavior with group behavior, and/or those with power with those with no power is just naive. At some point, a form of governance must be enacted and maintained.
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/28 19:02:36
    disinter
    Yes, the state is a group of thugs = violence.

    For most people, "anarchy" is a disturbing word, suggesting chaos, violence, antinomianism – things they hope the state can control or prevent. The term "state," despite its bloody history, doesn't disturb them. Yet it's the state that is truly chaotic, because it means the rule of the strong and cunning. They imagine that anarchy would naturally terminate in the rule of thugs. But mere thugs can't assert a plausible right to rule. Only the state, with its propaganda apparatus, can do that. This is what "legitimacy" means. Anarchists obviously need a more seductive label.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/or...
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/28 19:17:26
    WankerBait
    +1
    "But what would you replace the state with?"

    Not even the author of this post has an answer to this question.
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/28 19:21:53
    disinter
    Anarchy. Duh!
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/28 19:33:23 (edited)
    WankerBait
    Show me an example of a nation of anarchists...
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/28 19:42:09
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/28 20:35:07
    WankerBait
    Interestingly, all the example on the site have forms of governance, from chieftains, to tribes, all with law keepers and all were before the Judea-Christian religions were established and/or the industrial revolution.

    The forms of social-anarchism in these example are fine for small agrarian, communal villages, but are not relevant to modern societies. As you follow their history, you'll find all these organizations of social-anarchy ended up in either Feudal, Theocratic or monarchical societies where the powerful ruled over the less powerful masses.

    Neither Anarchism or Libertarianism are practical ideologies and neither is sustainable on a large scale...
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/29 02:42:43
    disinter
    +1
    All private, all voluntary. That is anarchy.
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/29 18:02:58
    WankerBait
    Unsustainable Idealism...
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/29 18:10:11
    disinter
    Happens all day, everyday.
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/29 19:06:00
    WankerBait
    Sure it happens every day around the dinner table or at the local pub, but not on a national/state level...
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/29 19:29:25
    disinter
    At any level.
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/28 19:43:40
    disinter
    Perhaps we can best answer your question by examining your own life.

    What roe does the government play in your existence? Does it help you live? Does it feed, clothe, and shelter you? Do you need it to help you work or play? If you are ill, do you call the physician or the policeman? Can the government give you greater ability than nature endowed you with? Can it save you from sickness, old age, or death?

    Consider your daily life and you will find that in reality the government is no factor in it at all except when it begins to interfere in your affairs, when it compels you to do certain things or prohibits you from doing others. It forces you, for instance, to pay taxes and support it, whether you want to or not. It makes you don a uniform and join the army. It invades your personal life, orders you about, coerces you, prescribes your behavior, and generally treats you as it pleases. It tells you even what you must believe and punishes you for thinking and acting otherwise. It directs you what to eat and drink, and imprisons or shoots you for disobeying. It commands you and dominates every step of your life. It treats you as a bad boy or as an irresponsible child who needs the strong hand of a guardian, but if you disobey it holds you responsible, nevertheless.

    http://libcom.org/library/wha...
  • WankerBait disinter 2010/07/28 20:35:14
    WankerBait
    Please stop the cutting and pasting of hyperbole... The hyperbole does not make a rational case for Anarchism.
  • disinter WankerBait 2010/07/29 02:42:58
    disinter
    What is hyperbole about it?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/30 16:05:55

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals