[!!!maryann!!!]

Far too often, I hear from my fellow Americans, that a libertarian view, is a step towards Anarchy. You know.....burning buildings, Mad Max, rape squads, that Anarchy.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy
a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2
a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : disorder

Everyone views Anarchy as the first meaning there....Total lack of Government. Lawlessness. Etc.

Let's look that the last definition. ABSENCE OF ORDER : DISORDER

Every seen a better description of our Federal Government?

Anarchy can also be millions of laws and regulations so complex that none of us could possibly be law-abiding. Anarchy can also be the total corruption and self-serving actions of our elected leaders.

I know I know.....you're about to say "WELL FIRE THOSE FUCKERS!!!"......and Again, I know I'm beating a dead horse....but I'm going to explain how the system itself is broken, and can't be fixed with a changing of the gate keepers.

EXAMPLE:

You are on an Island. You are the only person there. It's YOUR Island. You name it MYISLANDVILLE. You grow crops, you harvest fish, you set up a fresh water supply, you build a hut. You store extra water and wood and food. NO ONE is there to tell you you're being greedy. No one is there to explain to you that you are evil for having so much.

Enter PERSON2. Person2 shows up to your island. He doesn't like fishing, or working crops. He likes to watch butterflies. He begins explaining to you how you are greedy, and should share with him.

Enter PERSON3. Person3 shows up, with guns. He insists that to make things 'fair', everyone on the island will vote about the disposition of the food. He will enforce the votes, since he has the guns. He becomes the LAW.

This is similar to the Cop and the Baker, scenario.

When PERSON3 arrives on the island, armed with guns and 'laws'.....he begins taxing the goods of MYISLANDVILLE, to take from Person1, and give to Person2, under terms imposed by threat at gunpoint. We shall call him "GOVERNMENT".

This is where we are now, in the US. Everyone sits back and says ' look, we'll just vote down those laws....." . However, you can't, because PERSON2, will ALWAYS vote for MORE of PERSON1's stuff. And Person3, (aka GOVERNMENT people), will ALWAYS vote for MORE laws about Person1's stuff.

Folks, I say that that dreaded 'ANARCHY', is already here. When the amount to be taken from PERSON1, is voted on, by Person2, and Person3......it's nothing short of stealing.....

The island of three – one to produce, one to depend, and one to regulate - is how both our modern-day Republicans and Democrats view the world. They bitch about who gets to be the third guy on the island, differing only in how much they will take and what they reward and punish with the takings. And who gets to be Person2.

Neither abides by the Constitution they have sworn to defend, and both use the law as a weapon against the people.

Dependence is an unnatural state. It is created by excessive government and perpetuated by the continued expansion of government power. America has been turned into a nation where that first person on the island is vilified, the second is called a victim, and the third is revered. That is the twisted morality we call America.

I call it Anarchy.

[barsikjal]

INB4...DURR HERP.....dats the way it is!!!!!!!!

[rengerts]

I'll go a step beyond this.......

Today, I think many people view MYISLANDVILLE....like this.

Person3, collects enough to provide support for Person1, and Person2.......And thus this makes Person1 and Person2, DEPENDENT upon Person3.

I mean we just can't get by, without Government there to distribute things in a manner they and Person2, choose. Without Government, Nothing could function.

I submit that this is wrong.

[WeestDype]

Too many Laws that's for sure.

[Flatlytaize]

Too many Laws that's for sure.

Those laws are NEEDED by Person2 and Person3. Without them......they'd be responsible for themselves.

[Averti$ingGuru]

Decide if you are Person1, 2, or 3.

Those are the choices.

[Phighicle]

Anarchy describes a state whereby there is a complete absence of any government.

Not too much of it.

And personal responsibility is moot, since anarchy, by definition, implies the absence of an arbiter on one's behalf.

[r5YOPDyk]

Anarchy describes a state whereby there is a complete absence of any government.

Not too much of it.

And personal responsibility is moot, since anarchy, by definition, implies the absence of an arbiter on one's behalf.

You trolling?

It can also mean disorder.

[Sukadrukanga]

You trolling?

It can also mean disorder.

Disorder via absence of an arbiter of any kind.

It doesn't account for demonstrations, riots, or an argument over a penny ante game of poker.

Government is the diametric opposite of anarchy.

[in4wikiu]

Disorder via absence of an arbiter of any kind.

It doesn't account for demonstrations, riots, or an argument over a penny ante game of poker.

Government is the diametric opposite of anarchy.

I disagree.

[Cajlwdvx]

I disagree.

Why?

[muBXvWIC]

A LAWLESS GOVERNMENT BEGETS A LAWLESS SOCIETY.

AMERICA MOVES TOWARD ANARCHY AS VIRTUALLY EVERY ACT BECOMES

ILLEGAL AND NO ONE'S LIBERTY OR PROPERTY IS SAFE FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

[HagsPusia]

Why?

See Kleins post........and the quote from the OP.
Anarchy can also be millions of laws and regulations so complex that none of us could possibly be law-abiding. Anarchy can also be the total corruption and self-serving actions of our elected leaders.

[PrettyFifa12]

See Kleins post........and the quote from the OP.

Klein's describing the progress of a government towards unaccountability, and hence tyranny, if left unchecked.

Government and anarchy are diametric opposites.

A country may either be a tyranny or anarchic (arguably, under conditions of anarchy, it may not be a country at all). It cannot be both, by definition.

[Ztcgtqvb]

The Government itself can with it's actions.....promote total anarchy.

We're almost there.

[Zenunlild]

Klein's describing the progress of a government towards unaccountability, and hence tyranny, if left unchecked.

Government and anarchy are diametric opposites.

A country may either be a tyranny or anarchic (arguably, under conditions of anarchy, it may not be a country). It cannot be both, by definition.

A government can (and in our case, often DOES), morph into something different. Tyranny is a form of anarchy.

Anarchy....and the strong take what they want.
Tyranny.....


Disagree?

[Qnpqbpac]

Klein's describing the progress of a government towards unaccountability, and hence tyranny, if left unchecked.

Government and anarchy are diametric opposites.

A country may either be a tyranny or anarchic (arguably, under conditions of anarchy, it may not be a country at all). It cannot be both, by definition.

Unaccountability. No checks and balances. IE.....

[pesty4077]

A government can (and in our case, often DOES), morph into something different. Tyranny is a form of anarchy.

Anarchy....and the strong take what they want.
Tyranny.....


Disagree?

How does government equate with lawlessness and disorder?

Whatever the extent of it, and whatever it's mode of operation, it's still government.

Hence, it is not anarchy.

[nasxbrtyol]

Unaccountability. No checks and balances. IE.....

Which is an overbearing and corrupt government.

But a government, nonetheless.

[Blelidupgerie]

How does government equate with lawlessness and disorder?

Whatever the extent of it, and whatever it's mode of operation, it's still government.

Hence, it is not anarchy.

A lack of government. Picture that.

Roving gangs who do what they want. Picture that.

Now, picture those gangs wearing a uniform. It's the same difference.

When the government steps outside the law, it's no longer a 'government'. It's simply a gang, wearing a certain uniform.

Thus....it becomes Anarchy.