Many people belive that anarchy is chaos? I however belive it is a very advanced form of mutual cooperation. Tell me what you think, or what is right.
Byeah
2006-11-14 11:46:07 · 6 answers · asked by Bojangles 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I believe that anarchy, like true socialism, is not humanly possible, and for the same reasons.
2006-11-14 12:07:43 · answer #1 · answered by freebird 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"Anarchy" has more than one meaning. It can be properly used as a synonym for chaos. But anarchists -- people who believe in anarchism -- believe that anarchy, as they advocate it, simply means a rejection of hierarchical forms of social control. They believe human beings have the capacity to shape their own lives and do not need either to be told what to do or to tell others what to do. Yes, as you say, anarchists believe that human beings can cooperate with one another rather than engaging in competition and violence. According to this view, authoritarian forms of social control are more chaotic than social anarchy would be, and social anarchy would be better organized than society is at present.
2006-11-14 19:58:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. Any way you look at it, once you've taken the chaos out of anarchy, all you are left with is another establishment with new rules of order.
2. Order comes out of chaos. Anarchy is just a catalyst for change, but in a radical manner.
Good Luck with Warm Wishes
2006-11-14 20:17:40 · answer #3 · answered by mitch 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
By definition, its simply an absence of formal rule or power. It says nothing one way or another of mutual cooperation. They can co-exist, or not.
The best example of an anarchy with mutual cooperation is a wildebeest herd in Africa. The herd cooperates mutually for common interests, but sacrifices individuals who fail to cooperate (wander off) to the lions. Stampede the herd, and they mutually cooperate to trample non-conforming individuals without hesitation or community (government) repercussion.
Ironically, the absence of common rules actually squelches individualism, and rewards conformity. The opposite of the goals of the typical human anarchist.
2006-11-14 20:01:26 · answer #4 · answered by Houston, we have a problem 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
anarchy by definition is chaos. anarchy by principle is contradictory. cooperation involves organization and compromise, and to achieve cooperation a group would have to be bound by a set of guidelines, which goes against the very nature of anarchy. anarchy can never exist by a means of wanting it to. in order for that to happen anarchists would have to band together to propegate the notion, which, in turn, by banding together would make anarchists hypocrites. in order to propegate the notion, anarchists would have to convince others that conditions are so bad and human beings are decent enough to live together in harmony, without rules. harmony is not anarchy. by true nature of humanity we know that it is impossible to live together in harmony. if anarchy ever did exist, it would not work because the weak will flock to the strong for protection, in turn you would see the production of city states and anarchy would no longer exist.
2006-11-15 09:37:00 · answer #5 · answered by alex l 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchy is defined by three words, "disobedience of government" It may be carried out by an individual, mob or co-ordinated effort.
2006-11-14 20:05:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋