Anarchy vs Police state

I'd be perfectly fine with a benevolent (and competent) dictatorship.

I find the idea of a perfect state to be impossible as total freedom would rely on humans who imperfect. Unless we all become perfect then a perfect society is impossible, who knows, perhaps the only way we can become perfect is to become a hive mind.

BTW off topic but how do I put a link into my words, so that they go blue and clicking on them activates the link?

You can't spell ignorance without IGN.

Thorn@Yes,dictatorships always start that way then they show their true colors and crud hits the fan.I for one would do not want to live in a dicatatorship or I will lose my will to live.Worst of all what if this dictatorship had some horrible plans like mass extermination and other bad stuff.

I would go for police state, because then the infrastructure would be maintained, and we wouldn't have to fight to get to water, food etc.

"Roll d1000000"

That's true. Not matter how good a leader is, eventully they will die. Then whoever takes over could be less competent, they could be just as good, or they could be bad with bad evil plans. Then there is no way for you to get rid of them. If there was a way then evil would use it to depose of a good leader so that they can take over. Having a monarchy was pretty much gambling on whether or not your leader is any good or not.

You can't spell ignorance without IGN.

The format is [[link/Wiki Words Text that will show up]]. The space after the link or wiki words is crucial.

edited 9th Aug '11 9:42:36 AM by Ratix

It could be a police state by committee. Nobody ever said "police state" = "dictatorship." It normally does, but that isn't an absolute value...

I am now known as Flyboy.

1984 was police state by a committee (Inner Party). It's considered likely that "Big Brother" is a figurehead and not an actual person.

Now using Trivialis handle.

I'd probbaly o with anarchy; whoever has the most guns wins, and my friends and I fit that role quite well. We'd just establish our own colony, admit people with valuable skills, and annex or destroy any surrounding "anarchist utopias"

Does that live up to the (lack of) standards of anarchy?

Now using Trivialis handle.

...Kino, remind me never to let you anywhere near government. You can totally be in my Department of War (yes, I'm renaming it back to the original flavor) if I'm ever President. I need a good General Ripper. You can be counterpoint to Barkey's Only in It for the Money...

Seriously though, yeah... I haven't read 1984 in forever, so, I suppose you're right. That would be harder to overthrow, too...

I am now known as Flyboy.

I dunno, it sounds like the best way to go about surviving in actual anarchy. And assuming the "anarchist utopias" are Mad Max-style thugs plundering and killing everyone they come across, then good riddance.

@abstractematics; Just because something started with anarchy doesn't mean that will be it's end state.

@USAF: What are you talking about? I'm about 2 shades less reasonable than Barkey. You're right about me running the gov though; Federal Service would be a real concept, and may 8th would be Heinlein day.

So I have a possible solution to the problem of a good leader must die. The emperor of mankind of course!

Of course that's getting kind of off topic.

edited 9th Aug '11 10:03:18 AM by Dandark

You can't spell ignorance without IGN.

Police States you have the order but all your freedoms stripped. Anarchy you have freedom but no order and your basically on your own.

All I can say I hope we don't end up with a government like the world government in One piece which would suck.

It's easier to establish order as opposed to freedom.

Kino@ So,freedom is harder to obtain than order.Yeah,it's one things Americans like me want and value is freedom.I am okay with order because government is there for stability but at any time it can become our own worse nightmare.

I think anarchy and police states are two things goverment need to be prevented from becoming.

It is another reason why I am glad they didn't make George Washington a king besides he was infertile so he couldn't bear any heirs anyway.

[correction]

It's easier to make order out of anarchy, than it is to create freedom in a police state.

Kino@I can see where you are going because in anarchy you can find a leader to unite the people together to form unity and order.And that has happened in a lot of countries in history;China and England being examples.

In Police States they usually have the elections rigged so no one can vote fairly.

Assuming they have elections.

Kino@Yeah,I hate to see the schools that are in Police state schools.It would be an even more depressing and authoritive place to be.They would educate the students to obey the government and never question them.Heck,I have a feeling they would make a religion around the worship of the state and its leaders.Oh,we already have it and its name is N.Korea and its leader is Kim Jong II.

He's got some sweet shades though.

Kino@Jim Jones had nice shades and he could be considered a small scale version of a police state leader in pastors' clothing.

I think the reason why we Americans hate communism is because communist countries showed us the consequences and oppression of a police state.

I know not all Police states are communists but many police states have been associated with it.But one thing for sure is that they suck.

We love being able to tell our politicians to fuck off; it's as American as, speaking your mind and getting shit done.

Kino@Your mileage may vary when it comes when getting the job done but one of the worst things in a police state is you can't make fun your politicians or you end up in jail.