how do u imagine life with no president or bounderies between countries?

Question

i hate that in some countries the presidents takes his own decisions with out the people acceptance.. wht do u people think??

Answer 1

I assume by saying no president, you mean no government, and by no government you mean Anarchy...

Anarchies usually lead to very bad consequences... despite the rhetoric of anarchists about government distroying people's rights, usually anarchies end up with much death and distruction, and create a power vaccum into which the strongest despot is able to rise and sieze power.

Let's take a look at a few historical Anarchies and see if it has been good for the people in those societies...

First the French Revolution. In the time period immediatly following the French Revolution there is a short period of time known as the "Reign of Terror" which can only be discribed as an anarchy. During the Reign of Terror thousands of people were executed by the guillotine, and thousands more were killed in battles between competing factions. The nation of France was devistated by the Reign of Terror, and in the end it took the lives of between 18,500 to 40,000 people. Furthermore this situation lead to the creation of a weak governemnt which was eventually taken over by Napoleon Bonapart, leading to the massive Napoleonic was accross Europe. In reality, the Napoleonic Wars were the first true World War... in the end, history must see that the anarchy during the Reign of Terror was a tragic part of history, and shows the true evil that can come of an anarchy.

A more contemporary example of the horrors of anarchy is present day Somalia... Somalia, from 1991-2006, is cited by some as a real-world example of a stateless society and legal system. From the fall of Siad Barre's government in January of 1991 until the capture of Mogadishu by the Islamic Courts Union in June of 2006, Somalia had no significant centralized government, with large areas of the country ruled by such unrecognized mini-states as Somaliland, Puntland, and Southwestern Somalia.

The remaining areas, including the capital Mogadishu, were divided into smaller territories ruled by competing warlords. In many areas there were and still are no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.

Somalia is in an impoverished state now. Fighting between different factions has lead to countless deaths, the country's infrastructure is in ruins, mortality rates are astronomical, and unemployment is rampit! Warlords are the only law of the land, and they operate in a dictatorial and bruital fashion.

I'm all about reducing the governement, I certainly think the US federal government is way to large, and encroching on areas it absoutly should not have any authority... and having a more free immigration policy would be very benificial... though I certainly do not want an anarchy. Liberty is one thing, but without some protections, there is no such thing as liberty at all.

As I see it, the government is necessary to provide some very important things... namely, to adjucticate disputes between parties, to enforce simple laws against crimes that violate other's rights (ie, murder, rape, theft... not victimless crimes like drug use and prostitution), to provide defence against enemies at home and abroad, to enforce contracts, to provide limited infrastructure (ie, roads, when necessary), and to protect the liberty of the individual against invasion by either others or by law. If these simple limited things are provided by a government we are able to actually appriciate and enjoy liberty.... without these things we become slaves to those who are more powerful, and choose to use that power to do their will against us.

So, in summation, I imagine life the way you've discribed as nothing short of hell on earth... and hope it never comes to that.

Answer 2

I would like to say we would all get along really well and stuff but honestly without borders and control the world we have evolved into would be destroyed.

The only way humans would ever ban together and work as one on this planet would be if there was an attack on earth by another cililization or beings from another planet. And even then I am not sure if everyone would still get along. Since I don't see an alien attack coming anytime soon (lol) we are stuck with what we have been doing for centuries.

Answer 3

It's an absurd question. Boundaries started in prebiblical times to separate tribes and keeping them from killing each other. People have different viewpoints and ways of life. Some like sitting on their butts all day doing nothing. Others are productive and work from sun up to sun down. The haves don't particuarly like sharing their bounty with the have nots for a reason. Without government we have anarchy and craziness everywhere. I will come and take your things because i'm bigger than you or have better weapons.

Answer 4

I believe that anarchy is a terrible idea. Countries need a strong assertive government to protect, serve, and maintain a country. That's why America is a super power. Strong Government, Strong Military, Strong Citizens (not including Dems).

Answer 5

Anarchy and chaos. Tribal warfare. Mass starvation. In other words, an average day in the Middle East.

Answer 6

No Government+No Borders=Chaos

Answer 7

Sure.

For a great example of a leaderless society, read James P Hogans "Voyage from Yesteryear". It's an exploration of one possible post-scarcity model where there is no need for rigid hierarchical laws.

Answer 8

Read "Common Sense" by Thomas Paine (1774? 1776? or so) where he explains an actually cogent reason for a government - one limited in power and authority.

Answer 9

Like the Palestinians?

Answer 10

Complete Chaos. With no government, it will truly be survival of the fittest. The strong will rule the week.