maybe we can have a discussion on this.
ideally, i think that since we are homo sapiens, we ought to have an unparallel constant self accountability going on in and of itself, and we ought to look inwards to determine what course of action we should take in every aspect in our lives.
we must be able to tell right from wrong .
i am not saying there should be anarchy as a consequence of no govt.
but something better than a no govt. and a govt. … is what i am aiming to instill a talk about.
please join in this, if u like.
dushwari
Re: do you believe in no government
Having a government is must to run a 'society', but when those officials turn against you or start thinking of themselves as 'rulers' then that is bad. Purpose of governments should be serving its people ('government for people', not government 'on people'), they should protect the rights and lives of its citizens, they (people in government) should not be allowed to extract any personal benefits out of government etc.
Re: do you believe in no government
No Govt is fine.
Re: do you believe in no government
to have this discussion we need to understand what "government" is.
"man in nature" is this concept in political philosophy that refers to the old ages when human beings used to live in nature w/out any "government" (concept of government is also reffered to in political philosophy as a "social contract").
So when man used to live in "nature", there were no rules (i.e. no government). Infact man used to live very much like other animals. Hunting, sleeping finding shelter, protecting its young etc. In nature, the strong used to survive, and the weak would not, as is the case with other animals as well.
When you say living by our internal homosapien rules - thats what those rules would be - survival of the fittest. b/c homosapien internal rules are not much different then rules of animals. We have the same urge to survive! protect our young etc (which some argue is really our own survival b/c its our ability to outlast even our own bodies - anyway thats another discussion)
now, b/c we have the ability to create and think in a way different then other animals, we came up with "social contracts". Basically a contract b/t a few fellow human beings living by each other that said you dont kill me, i dont kill you, etc! we will live next to each other and deal with each other according to some rules that we both will agree on. thats where "social contract" began. Most basic form of social contract is b/t 2 ppl. its a contract about society - how we socilize with one another.
the more basic forms of "social contracts" are tribes. you are part of a tribe you follow certain rules that you all agree to (mostly by being born into a family that is a member of the tribe). This was extended to make cities, and nations.
Today's nation-states "governments" are basically a whole set of rules that we all agree to (ofcourse now that agreeing is only nominial b/c we dont really sign anything that says - well we agree to all these laws. you agree to it by staying in the society/ by not protesting and trying to overthrow it/ b/c you were born there).
When u say "no-government" u always mean anarchy. there is either a goverment or there is anarchy. there really is no in the middle - u can say little gov't or more gov't - but thats still government. and anarchy would mean we are going back to the "state of nature" - i.e. live by internal base animalistic rules where the strong survive.
Ironically anarchy - or the desire for no or less government is considered very conservative. b/c generally the elites with power have wanted less government b/c that means survival of the fittest and as the more powerfull they would ofcourse survive and rule. Communism = absolute left and means lots of goverment. Socialism - which is what i like - and a lot of eurpean countires practice also means more government - it means u dont let the political leaders become kings (like george bush) u keep them in check with lots of laws, that the people make. Repubicans in the US are also in favor or less government, and i am sure the people in power in the US right now would love no government!
I am a strong supporter of government, infact i think we need more rules..good rules that we agree to, so there is less chaos.
the international legal world is just developing and look at whats heppening in the international arena - the strong win/ the strong survive and the poor countries get crushed. Law isnt strong eough, once we have interntional laws, good ones, strong ones that are not in name only laws, then it will not be just the strong surviving. however ofcourse the powerful dont want any government in the internaitonal arena, its bad enoug thy have to live by laws domestically.
Many great idealistic people have fought hard battles to bring about rules that we can live by that even the floor for all, unfortunately they are being severely undermined! i hope to have a stronger government! i will never agree to "no-government"!!!
Re: do you believe in no government
the other problem with no government and living by our own internal concepts of what right is....whose concept would that be?
i think we should all live in harmony with each other and with our planet the earth. I think thast the best way to live ahppily is if we are nice to each other and care for our planet/ our environments, and respect the animals around us also.
Dick chenney thinks he should have as much power as possible and that ts okay to kill poor people so that he can have access to this power. maybe its b/c his name is dick... i dont know...but whatever, that what he feels. He believes that the strong should survive and the weak should just die...
So whose rules do we live by?
thats how the idealists came up with social contract - that said dick you cant run around killing people, if you want what others have you have to ask them, and take it by rules that you both agree to. as u can imagine the dick cheney's of this world were like..hell no i will kill u al before i do that...and so...it was a long hard battle but finally we have laws and we refine them and make them better as we become more enlightened. and i hope that tradition continues and we dont regress...even inspite of people like bush and cheney who would like to see to it that we never have a social contract. ad rather then living by rules we all agree to living by thier own ruls doing whatever they want