|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:53 pm
Direct democracy and Anarchy are not "literally" the same thing, but they are very similar. Direct democracy is a form of democracy that allows people to directly propose and vote on laws. No need of representatives or "higher-ups" the people think-up, vote on and carry out the laws THEY choose...much like the philosophy of anarchy. Anarchy is meant to be a state where people are capable of living together, peacefully, without over-looking government. basically, there would be a "government" but it would consist of each individual.
Unfortunately, the media and government have infused into people, this thought that Anarchy means "total, uncontrolled chaos". Which simply isn't true, they twist your minds to think that without them, everyone would die. This is a fear tactic used to establish and keep power. Every official that comes in blinds the people more and more, and scares them all, to the point where it seems too risky to live without government. I probably stated this before, but EVERY new form of government has the possibility of turning to anomy. When the American government was established after the revolution, people were afraid without Britain that they would become lawless under this new democracy, did that happen? People now are afraid without America people will become lawless under THIS new democracy, but will it happen? Chances are, it won't.Fear is a powerful tool, and politicians are very proficient in it's use.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 10:36 am
the person who started this forum has a valid point, these arent too far from anarchy. however i must say that they are not attempts of anarchy, because these are methods government, anarchy is characterised, by the lack there-of, its based on the idea that the people on an individual level can govern themselves, which has a tendency to fail, but could however be a very if not the most effective form of gov't, think of it; no bueracracy, no pesky communes(although people would likely form small organized communes or markets, say over the area of a city, to benefit themselves and bye extension others.) this is all based on the idea that each and every person can play a fair game, so as to say that they would stay honest,not endeavor in ways to gain benefit at the cost of their fellow mans grief or money. unfortunatley, im sad to say, this is not ganna happen in the forseeable future due to so many peoples' will to do almost anything for a comfortable living, particularly in our freemarket system, where people make a living running pyramid sceams, only to rip off honest investors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
