Total Freedom or Total Security?
I would choose anarchy since I beleive security should be your personal responsibility.
What about you.
2006-08-19 16:14:13 · 14 answers · asked by fireburn 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Total freedom. (I'm a libertarian.)
[But I should note that by "anarchy," high-falutin political philosopher types tend to mean something very different from what you mean here, and what most laymen mean. I bought a book on "anarchy" and the philosophies, and what you realize is that all the specific views are essentially one or another version or modification of communism.]
2006-08-19 16:21:54 · answer #1 · answered by A professor (thus usually wrong) 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Anarchy. Man yearns to be free. Suppressing this desire over time usually leads to his violating the strictures of the fascist regime in some way. Prison or death might ensue. And, besides, no state can provide total security.
2006-08-19 16:37:53 · answer #2 · answered by ewb843 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would choose Anarchy, as I am an Anarcho-primitivist. For only when people have control of thier own destinies, may the individual flourish.
Check out some John Zerzan and some John Feliss man, you'll love them.
2006-08-19 16:37:28 · answer #3 · answered by ? 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither would be my first choice, but of the two I'd choose anarchy hands down. Freedom is always preferable to oppression.
2006-08-22 10:56:24 · answer #4 · answered by ConcernedCitizen 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I spoke to some Anarchists a while ago. They thought we would all hold hands under a rainbow, or something. "what about - say -a cannibal paedophile -would you respect his individuality?" I asked? "That wouldn't happen, of course" they sneered. "How?" "We would sort them out" they scoffed. "So what you propose - is more like mob rule?" "Er...." "Well let me tell you" I said - "under anarchy, as you describe - the ones with the silly purple hair , such as yourselves will be the first to get it from the mob". "We're not talking to you anymore", they huffed.
End of conversation. I now think the term "anarchy" if a word invented by one half of the middle classes to piss off the other half.
2006-08-22 00:06:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchy. Without doubt.
2006-08-19 16:35:40 · answer #6 · answered by Thorbjorn 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I HAD to choose, I'd go with anarchy.
2006-08-19 16:22:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither, I had some kin in Russia that were murdered because of them, and that i'm not playing sufferer because my existence is at the moment more beneficial effectual yet they could both come for my relations because of wealth, faith or refusing to hitch their protection rigidity.
2016-11-05 05:03:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess I agree with you. But at least the fascists would keep ****** potheads from pissing on my lawn. And the trains would run on time.
Love, Jack.
2006-08-19 16:36:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchy, in a heartbeat...
2006-08-19 16:24:25 · answer #10 · answered by RATM 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋