Con Man, you are good at arguing. But some people are powerless against a determined group and are desperate for something different. Example, Nazis. The people had a bad economy, army, and no respect for Germany before the Nazis came in. The people wanted change, and a minority cause like Nazism caused that. Same principles apply.

@Tom: No. Before this system is set up, people need to be educated. To be able to get things, people will have to work a certain amount of time. This will not be enforced, but before we enter this system, all businesses should know that not working hurts society, and since they won't lose any money (as there is no money) by refusing service to a person who hasn't worked, why wouldn't they refuse service?

@killer: But in my system, why would people want a change?

Conservative Man: Your plan is so ridiculously optimistic that I makes me even question if you are serious. You place WAY too much faith in people doing what is necessary to benefit society as a whole. People will always do whats best for them over whats best for others.

Alright con man, just lay out your whole system right here so i know what you're arguing for. Explain your anarchist views, and how your *perfect system* works.

Can things not be improved using a goverment? I don't think current governments and societies are good. However I think this anarchy thing could be a possibility in the far future, not now as it would lead to disaster. What needs to be done now is an improvement upon governments and societies.

Tell me something, killer and Bombadil, are your mothers stupid cunts, just like you?

How did you guess???

@Tom: As I pointed out, the companies doing what's best for society does not hurt them at all, so why not help out society?

"Alright con man, just lay out your whole system right here so i know what you're arguing for. Explain your anarchist views, and how your *perfect system* works"

+1

@killer: It's not a perfect system, but it's better than what we have now. And I already explained it above.

Anarchy with militias and people working for businesses for no money every day, Are you sure this isn't slavery we're talking about here?

No, because, they can get things for no money. Capitalism is slavery, because we are dependent on the wages we get from working.

Yet another argument against your point made, If you can get whatever you want for free, what's to stop someone from getting more than what he needs? Surely he could show up to different places to get it, and no police,government, or militia would be able to do anything?

@Killer: Nothing. What's the problem with that?

I have to leave soon, but just to interject for a moment. I agree with CM on many issues (not the Christianity), but one problem I see with what CM and I want is relative scarcity. If we could remove that and thus remove opportunity cost, it would be good. But until then...

What if you run out? Surely your amazing factories of slavery can't produce enough of one item that it can survive everyone hoarding that product.

@killer: Why not? And stop calling it slavery. It's not anymore slavery than our current system.

So conservative Man, you believe that if governments were removed everyone would do what is best for society and everyone would therefore work hard, get along, care for others who aren't friends or family, and live happily? If people were like that many problems in the past wouldn't have happend. If people were like that than we would already be living in a society like that.

And why do you think anarchy is the solution? What is wrong with an improved government? Nothing like your current government but still a government.

@Lord Gartho: All government is oppressive. From a dictatorship to minarchy, they all use violence to control people. Plus, I believe God wants anarchy. "To seek the rule of man is to reject the rule of God"

Maybe free healthcare and education. And government owned companies. And increased cooperation to create huge amounts of food, water, housing, public transportation, common products, and other types of infrastructure.

Also, I believe my system would limit the desires to hurt society for personal gain. For example, there is no point in stealing.

A proper anarchist model still has to create proper incentives for working hard and contributing to society, but these are not very difficult. Anarchist themselves often separate ideologically on how best to meet these issues.

An anarcho-primitivist would advocate small groups that rely solely on the other for survival, and incentivize contribution with... life. :)

Obviously an anarcho-capitalist would see free enterprise without state intervention as the ultimate arbiter of economic relationships and incentive for contribution.

I could go on and on, but please note that most, if not all the reasons why people contribute to society and work have little to nothing to do with the existence of a coercive State per se.

"To seek the rule of man is to reject the rule of God" - Isn't this suggesting a Theocracy? And I don't consider my country's (Canada) government oppressive with violence. I think it just needs to be more totalitarianistic to create more justice and equality.

I assume you don't live in Toronto, Mr. Gartho? :)

I think this all does go back to my point "No government leads to drug countries". And it does. Simple enough it seems, that with no government, druggies would run everywhere, and near everyone would start doing them. Then production in your totalitarian factories might get delayed from production because your Workers for Free are all high.

Yes, you are correct kind sword. Are you referring to G20, G8? Also, I am Lord Gartho, not Mr. Gartho. I didn't choose to be born to a lord just to get called Mr.

Actually, drug cartels result from the general illegality of narcotics in the global market, which limits the channels of trade to those willing to break the law (aka drug cartels). Obviously, such laws are the product of powerful states (aka the big United one). Drug usage, furthermore, is statistically higher in poorer and more repressive states... exactly the ones where drugs are most difficult to obtain.

Drug crime (and the power of the associated individuals), and drug usage are all positively correlated with state mandate, power, and degree of attempted interference.

So.... try again? :)