2006-12-05 13:31:28 · 10 answers · asked by lazydazy 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Anarchists believe in decentralized democracy. If a decision affects everyone in the area, then anarchists have no problem with making that decision democratically. If a decision affects less people, anarchists would argue that decision should only be made by those most affected. In many cases, like deciding what you should eat or wear, this comes down to a democracy of one - thus anarchy.
Supporters of anarchism believe it is the opposite of random killing because the decision to kill someone affects the victim the most, thus the victim should have the most say over whether he lives or dies. Murderers would not be able to go around killing randomly because every potential victim is affected and thus have a say over whether murderers should be able to go free.
In terms of economics, most anarchists believe control over the general policy and management of corporations should be done democratically, whether it's by an assembly of the employees or by an assembly of those who live in the communities the corporation serves.
Many anarchists tend to favor direct democracy over representative democracy, because many are wary of how easily representatives are corrupted after they are elected.
2006-12-08 06:01:38 · answer #1 · answered by cyu 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchism, or anarchy is a situation where there is no government. This idea appeals to some people, but if you consider that without government, you couldn't leave your home. With no police force, no fire department, you couldn't leave to go to work.
Democracy is a misused term. They tell you in school that you live in a democracy. Politicians love to throw the term around. The fact is, the U.S. is not, and never was a democracy. It is a republic. The difference between the two is, a democracy is a form of government based on majority rule. There is no protection for the minority. A lynch mob is a good example of a democracy.
A republic, on the other hand, is rule by law. Laws are voted on in a democratic process, but they are supposed to be judged by the Constitution. If a law is in violation of the Constitution, it is null and void.
Probably most of the federal laws on the books today are unconstitutional. The Patriot Act violates the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. The Departments of Education and Energy violate the Tenth Amendments.
Government is a necessary evil. When government gets big, as in Nazi Germany, the USSR, you will see just how evil it can get.
2006-12-05 13:42:59 · answer #2 · answered by iraqisax 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Anarchy is usually followed by totalitarianism.
There is no link between Democracy & Anarchism.
2006-12-05 18:04:20 · answer #3 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
About the only thing they have in common is the "rights"?? of the workers and they have different views on how workers should take part in governing. Anarchism advocates violent overthrow of oppressors, USA democracy only advocates violent overthrow of evil rulers somewhere, anywhere in the world but America.
2006-12-05 13:48:39 · answer #4 · answered by longroad 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchists value their liberty and don't like being told what to do. This does not mean they will at once do bad things. They are People who like their freedom, that's it. Democracy is about who gets a say in group decisions. An anarchist might be a democrat as he is free to chose to be one. He would not feel the need to suggest anyone else (other anarchist pals no doubt) should been one, not because he isn't free to do so. It would just be uncool and they might beat him up, Democratically.
2006-12-05 13:51:54 · answer #5 · answered by mince42 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion they lie along the same spectrum. On one end of the spectrum you have anarchy where nothing is regulated and everyone has absolute freedom, theoretically even the freedom to kill. On the other end of the spectrum you have totalitarianism where there is no freedom and everything and everyone is regulated. Obviously either one of those scenarios is impossible. Anyways democracy is somewhere in the middle where people give up some of their freedom i.e. the right to kill, the right to keep all of their earnings, and get some regulation/order/stability in return.
2006-12-05 14:39:34 · answer #6 · answered by Brandon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it seems that that not all individuals - you're an social gathering - are as you describe. sensible ones, and there look somewhat some interior the hot administration, look totally conscious of the subjects you outline, and are only placing out on the monumentally uphill pastime of addressing them. this is going to likely be monumentally uphill because they are going to face, at each and every turn, the mass bigotry and stupendous lack of comprehend-how you've defined. and that i will ensure you're not any Marxist-Leninist. In Europe lets probably imagine of you as a social democrat. by the way, are you interpreting sociology, history or political technology? good luck including your degree, besides.
2016-11-30 04:53:26 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simple, put Bush in charge of a Democracy and you will have anarchy.
2006-12-06 06:55:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democracy is what happens when anarchists realise they'd be more effective if their anarchy was organized for maximum impact.
2006-12-05 16:41:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Link? there's a link? Tell me about this link then I'll answer your question!
2006-12-05 13:33:56 · answer #10 · answered by markawfg 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋