Anarchy

Simply put, do you think this works long term. Some people seem to be under the impression that abolishing work and government would be the best path for everyone. Something like people having more agency over their hours and work that is necessary and beautiful (whatever that means). Seems like the only opinions Come from anarchist websites and I don’t see any proof to lead me to believe that it would work. Just some view points by notable writers.

At best, Anarchy can only work for a short time in certain situations. If an Anarchic society was possible, we would have seen it by now.
That goes for all fringe social theories.

Another thought: It always seems the people who promote anarchy the most are nerdy, weirdo types who probably don’t fit in anywhere. They’re like libertarians on steroids.

Simply put, do you think this works long term. Some people seem to be under the impression that abolishing work and government would be the best path for everyone. Something like people having more agency over their hours and work that is necessary and beautiful (whatever that means). Seems like the only opinions Come from anarchist websites and I don't see any proof to lead me to believe that it would work. Just some view points by notable writers.
First define anarchy. Lois

Spain’s political system allows for many parties to exist. When citizens vote, they vote for a party, not an indevidual. This means that the seats in a city, local, regional, or national governments are made up of multiple parties that must make coalitions to govern. It also means that parties that get enough votes for a ruling majority can govern without any coalition or compromise. There are small towns in Spain, where the major and the town government are all from the anarchist/socialist party. The anarchists never win enough national or even regional votes to to have a say, but there are these small towns where they are in charge.
A couple years ago, the anarchist mayor of a town organized citizens raids on retail stores in its area, and confiscated basic living supplies. I’m not really sure how it all worked out in the end, but the regional and national governments had to get involved. There were also parties that ran and won seats after the crisis of 2008 that ran and won seats promising to block banks from evicting people when they defaulted on their mortgage. The current major of Barcelona is from a party that promised this. But, I don’t think she has been able to deliver on that promise.
Here is an article about it http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/aug/15/spanish-robin-hood-sanchez-gordillo

I guess I’m referring to also what they mean by work.
http://www.notbeinggoverned.com/anarchy-can-never-work/

Apparently they see the economy as an expression of the human spirit, some kind of drive to create.
http://www.spunk.org/texts/intro/faq/sp001547/secI4.html

Anyone who thinks anarchy is a good idea should be willing to try it out on a small scale first to see if it willhold up in all areas. Let’s start with traffic laws. no traffic lights, no stop signs, no speed limits, no traffic laws of any kind, no emission controls, no vehicle insurance, no cops, no ambulances, no fire engines, no 911, no road, bridge or tunnel maintenance. In fact, no riules about the direction traffic goes in or which side of the street people drive on. Let’s give it a try and see how it goes… Then we can move on to bigger and better things, like, say, air traffic control.

Simply put, do you think this works long term. Some people seem to be under the impression that abolishing work and government would be the best path for everyone. Something like people having more agency over their hours and work that is necessary and beautiful (whatever that means). Seems like the only opinions Come from anarchist websites and I don't see any proof to lead me to believe that it would work. Just some view points by notable writers.
First define anarchy. Lois Here is a definition given in one of the links. '“...anarchy" means a complete absence of coercive rulers.' I have no idea, given human nature, how a general society could arrive at that state. There will always be someone who will be coercive and, usually someone who will coerce back, in an attempt not to be coerced. Thus, I think that attempts to reach this definition of anarchy can never succeed, and in fact would likely lead to a whole lot of coercion.
Simply put, do you think this works long term. Some people seem to be under the impression that abolishing work and government would be the best path for everyone. Something like people having more agency over their hours and work that is necessary and beautiful (whatever that means). Seems like the only opinions Come from anarchist websites and I don't see any proof to lead me to believe that it would work. Just some view points by notable writers.
First define anarchy. Lois Here is a definition given in one of the links. '“...anarchy" means a complete absence of coercive rulers.' I have no idea, given human nature, how a general society could arrive at that state. There will always be someone who will be coercive and, usually someone who will coerce back, in an attempt not to be coerced. Thus, I think that attemPpts to reach this definition of anarchy can never succeed, and in fact would likely lead to a whole lot of coercion. Power loves a vacuum. Lois
Anyone who thinks anarchy is a good idea should be willing to try it out on a small scale first to see if it willhold up in all areas. Let's start with traffic laws. no traffic lights, no stop signs, no speed limits, no traffic laws of any kind, no emission controls, no vehicle insurance, no cops, no ambulances, no fire engines, no 911, no road, bridge or tunnel maintenance. In fact, no riules about the direction traffic goes in or which side of the street people drive on. Let's give it a try and see how it goes.. Then we can move on to bigger and better things, like, say, air traffic control.
Anyone who seriously advocates anarchy has not thought about it beyond their personal, immediate, benefits. The moment you extend it beyond that you see the lunacy of it.
I guess I'm referring to also what they mean by work. http://www.notbeinggoverned.com/anarchy-can-never-work/
Like I posted above - these are weird nerds who have difficulty relating to others. They're very likely on the Autism spectrum.
Anyone who thinks anarchy is a good idea should be willing to try it out on a small scale first to see if it willhold up in all areas. Let's start with traffic laws. no traffic lights, no stop signs, no speed limits, no traffic laws of any kind, no emission controls, no vehicle insurance, no cops, no ambulances, no fire engines, no 911, no road, bridge or tunnel maintenance. In fact, no riules about the direction traffic goes in or which side of the street people drive on. Let's give it a try and see how it goes.. Then we can move on to bigger and better things, like, say, air traffic control.
Anyone who seriously advocates anarchy has not thought about it beyond their personal, immediate, benefits. The moment you extend it beyond that you see the lunacy of it.Anarchy advocates think their goony thoughts are shared by everyone.