Time for a Change?
Cosmo | 29.04.2003 13:59
With the complete breakdown of law and order in Iraq, instigated by the Coalition of Globalists, we were told by the media ‘anarchy’ had taken hold and were shown images of Iraqi’s looting property with gay abandon. However, that was not anarchy, but temporary lawlessness, but even without police and prisons this rampage was sporadic and short-lived and religious leaders were able to coax looters to return stolen property, which really belonged, by right, to the people of Iraq anyway.
With no form of government in Iraq, no rules and no laws, there were only a few vigilante, revenge attacks, the ordinary man still conducted himself with respect for his fellows. Many volunteered their labour to restore public services for the benefit of the whole community. That is real anarchy, where people work towards the common good, without any authority demanding it or enforcing it at gunpoint. We don’t need government, we need like-minded people, to co-operate in making society a place where human life takes priority over profit and property.
Iraqi’s demonstrated that, in the face of intense adversity.
With no form of government in Iraq, no rules and no laws, there were only a few vigilante, revenge attacks, the ordinary man still conducted himself with respect for his fellows. Many volunteered their labour to restore public services for the benefit of the whole community. That is real anarchy, where people work towards the common good, without any authority demanding it or enforcing it at gunpoint. We don’t need government, we need like-minded people, to co-operate in making society a place where human life takes priority over profit and property.
Iraqi’s demonstrated that, in the face of intense adversity.
Cosmo
Comments
Hide the following 10 comments
interessting
29.04.2003 17:58
Would guns be available to anyone who wanted them in an anarchist state ?
wallace
The Trouble Is...
29.04.2003 19:11
Anarchists are really Social Darwinists who haven't the nerve to say so openly. Their theorising will remain precisely that until human beings are created perfect...
Judge_Mental
How does our goverment deal with the BAD??guy
29.04.2003 21:15
And what kind of control does our law abiding rules
give to us. Pharmaceutical companies getting off with
murder, ok'd by the same people who fill the jails with
people who are criminalised for using drugs of there
own choosing.
The law for media ot write what they want about ordinary street people who do not agree with there ways/who at the same time will end up in there own court for calling someone boring etc. well anyone who has enough money to
take them through there so called courts of justice.
The so called law that governs this land is so predudiced,
between rich and poor
between local people and local goverment
between peoples human rights and central goverment.
Surely we could do better.
antijen
you seem to have missed something....
29.04.2003 22:11
1.Political disorder and confusion.
2.Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.
in this case, how is anarchy working towards a common good?
yes that property should have belonged to the iraqi people, not just the leaders and yes, we should have kicked sadam out in 1991 and saved millions of lives.
this society does need a government, no matter how much you argue that things would be ok without one but ask yourself this, with out a government who would provide funds for schools? without tax, where we get the money from to provide for those schools? lets face it we wouldn't part with our money if we didnt have to. what would people on benifits do? its all very well wishing for a better world where everyone gets along but human beings just cant do it, they are greedy, arrogent and far to stupid.
do not bite the hand that feeds you.
deedee
one govt.-self govt.
30.04.2003 01:21
"You may say i'm a dreamer but i'm not the only one,
I hope someday u will join us........"
oi!
What Thu?
30.04.2003 02:11
Ilove all these neo-political terms it's almost as if they mean something. Goverments or any Authority in control of people do so with force. Anarchy would not be any different but it would be a lot worse.
Who controls the creation of wealth?, those who benifit from the riches of consumerism or those who don't?
Who complains and demonstrates against democracies? those who benifit from its rule or those who it forces to heal?
We have to follow some kind of leadership however faulty but I would rather an established system than one so easily hyjacked by a warlord in my region.
You can take your Anarchy and stuff it in the communistic toilet of unworkable political dreams.
Simon
No answer, so I'll try again....
30.04.2003 02:25
I'd like a yes or a no.
If I want a gun, will anyone stop me having it ?
Please.
Why is there a reluctance to answer such a straightforward question ?
wallace
why do u want a gun?
30.04.2003 04:41
oi!
Of course you can
30.04.2003 09:04
Now I guess if you went around using that gun on innocents, then people would start getting annoyed and worried, so they'd probably try to take you out, or chop your hands of or something.
So don't try it, ok.
Point is, people can prevent unsociable behaviour without needing a government to do it for them.
Another thought: Although in today's society being selfish pays off, we must realise that the ideal society would have everyone being nice to each other. And if you were born in such a society, there would be no incentive to be selfish (because they are already being as nice as they can to you!).
I think the route there is the most important thing. And I think it's got to involve people getting together, discussing politics, forming huge coalitions and taking action.
Mister Obvious
Of Course!
30.04.2003 21:51
But that is a falsity... people are generally humanitarian when they are not having adverse conditions forced on them, like war and starvation.
As for the question where would taxes come for education - blah -blah - it takes a whole village to raise and teach a child proper values, not a fascist-controlled "education" system.
Cosmo