And "Neither" is the obvious response, so please, enlighten the unenlightened ME! Thanks
2007-03-05 10:45:00 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
How about tyranny being Mom's rule, and Anarchy being the Babysitter on the phone with her boyfriend and everyone free to do whatever they want. I don't know, you figure it out. It's really not too difficult. Ok, anarchy = no central authority, every man to himself tyranny = highly centralized authority, the oppressor is the law
2007-03-05 10:57:02 · update #1
I would rather live in anarchy because I would not worry about pissing off the head of state and having him or her kill me, torture me, or enprision me!!
2007-03-05 10:49:34 · answer #1 · answered by katlvr125 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In this situation, tyranny. In all the world where tyranny exists or has existed, most people are unaffected by the government, other then possibly not having enough food, opportunities, etc, but even under some tyrants, that is not a factor. In anarchy, it is always everyman for himself, your best friend could kill you for your mate, food, water, clothes, there is never peace or a chance at a normal life. Tyranny is no great prize, but stands head and shoulders above anarchy.
2007-03-05 10:55:47 · answer #2 · answered by psycmikev 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would have to choose a tyranny because anarchy would entail such short life spans. At least in a tyranny, the tyrant would still need skillful people to survive, which means a better chance to survive.
2007-03-09 03:10:13 · answer #3 · answered by ringolarry 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchy. Anarchy is always prefereble to tyranny. At least in anarchy you have a chance at making your own choices...with tyranny...the choices are made for you and you have to accept the outcome...even when it means your death, or worse...and beleive me there are things that are FAR worse than death.
2007-03-06 21:25:17 · answer #4 · answered by kveldulf_gondlir 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm going with anarchy. Tyrants have too many shields to hide behind, making them hard to neutralize. On the other hand, a batch of other anarchists who just happen to think that I'm their slave or serf are easy to wipe out, and I wouldn't feel bad about it.
2007-03-05 11:25:50 · answer #5 · answered by knight2001us 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I refuse to live in any!! With tyranny, you can get enslaved and killed and at the leaders command if they don't want you around!!! With Anarchy, you have to worry about more then one person wanting to kill, rape, steal from you, or enslave you!!! HUGH, WHAT A LIFE!!!! That shouldn't even have to be questioned!!! So I will die first with a gun in my hand if either were to come about!!!
2007-03-05 10:56:33 · answer #6 · answered by kirk o 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
details really required. Tyranny with what leader? anarchy in what society?
2007-03-05 10:49:46 · answer #7 · answered by imnottellingmyname 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why ought to you ask this question and not furnish an answer for Republic? they have all been seen to now no longer paintings very ideal aside from the only we've. ok. each and each and each little thing yet a Democracy. ought to desire to you think of of what ought to ensue if mob ruled real right here. ninety% of folk could be no longer able to even stability their checkbook now no longer to instruct settle on for what's suitable for each individual. human beings make too many judgements without looking down the line to substantiate if it quite is the suitable component. we are a self gratification society that must be shield somewhat from ourselves.
2016-10-02 10:52:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anarchy. Anarchy for all!! Rock on.
2007-03-05 12:20:27 · answer #9 · answered by Butterfly 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am perfectly capable of governing myself and my own actions. Therefore, I would choose anarchy.
2007-03-05 13:49:16 · answer #10 · answered by The Lamb of Vista 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋