Anarchy vs. Dictatorship
Which would be better, anarchy or tryanny?
posted by Socrates3000 at
7:29 AM
Monday, October 03, 2011
Which would be better, anarchy or tryanny?
Which would be better, anarchy or tryanny?
Which would be better, anarchy or tryanny?
About This Web Log
This site is a forum for Political Theory class discussion. As you read and respond to each other's posts, keep in mind the words of Voltaire: "Although I disagree with what you have to say, I will defend to the death your right to say it."Previous Posts
19 Comments:
Anarchy or Dicatorship (Tyranny)? I would have to say i support Anarchy. Giving Americans free will? How harmful could that be? Not harmful at all. These corrupt politicians are too busy ruining America! Most of them are only runling for what they want and not what's best for America as a whole. Definitely not a dictatorship (tyranny)! God No! I feel as though Anarachy is just simply the best choice for the Amercian Society as whole. When people feel as though someone has complete and total control over them that's when they become rebellious and disobedient.
By
@darien_isaac, at 12:31 PM
Tyranny would be better than anarchy where we lived in the state of nature. Tyranny there are rules and strict punishments for breaking them that encourage people to follow laws. if there were no laws alot of people would just do as they please and there would be no official consequences. Serial killers and violent individuals could attack someone new everyday without fear of imprisonment.
By
Unknown, at 1:10 PM
Tyranny would be much better to have than anarchy. Anarchy would be complete chaos and lead to many disastrous things, like violence. At least with tyranny there would be rules followed and more people would not break laws.
By
courtsport007, at 1:16 PM
I think that a dictatorship would be better for our country. I say this because if we didn't have any direction, then we would have no idea what to do. If we had a system (or lack of system) of anarchy, then the country would be an absolute mess.
By
chad_mcdermott, at 2:38 PM
I would, without a doubt, live under a dictatorship. Even though the typical dictator today commits basic human rights violations on a regular basis, anarchy only pushes our society backwards in development. Dictators are also much easier to resist than absolute anarchy because the suppressed individuals have a common enemy that they can unite against, but if society existed in anarchy (which in of itself is a paradox), it would be much more difficult to unite the people under the same flag. Additionally, dictatorship is simply one step away from a democratic republic. The Arab Spring demonstrates this notion because as these oppressive governments and dicatators are crumbling, the revolutionaries cried out for Democracy and it is likely that representative governments will seize power soon. The people need government. We will end up with a dictator should we establish anarchy, so there is no reason why we should not skip the petty wars that would precede the inevitable dictatorship.
By
John, at 5:12 PM
Tyranny is unfortunate alternative but nonetheless the preferable option. A life that requires constant vigilance can't be healthy or happy. It would be better for people to be guaranteed security at the cost of a number of rights. Under anarchy, some rights are lost anyway. Being your own person or minding your own business can get you killed. Additionally, a person's life expectancy would be shorter in an anarchy. There would be very little healthcare and crime would be tolerated. At least under a dictatorship there would be protection and a system of legality. Also, a tyranny can be the first stepping stone on the road to a more tolerable form of government once a rebellion was stirred and a respectable leader stepped forward. Alternately, the only government system to come out of anarchy would be that very tyranny.
By
Groovey2Shoes, at 5:42 PM
Tyranny would be far better than anarchy because although there would be stricter regulations, it would provide more safety for everyone. Giving up rights ensures safety in society, whereas anarchy would create chaos and danger among people.
By
kristinmcfar, at 5:51 PM
What's behind door number three?
But if I have to pick between door number 1 (Anarchy) or door number 2 (Tyranny), I would probably live under a tyranny. It has been proven time after time that people need control. Take what happened a couple months ago when the Egyptian president was pretty much over thrown. The streets were looted, buildings were catching on fire, it was complete and total chaos. People need some kind of regulation. Even though tyranny is not a pleasant state to be in, it it better than the other extreme.
By
unidentified formulated onoma, at 6:40 PM
i think that our country would be better with a dictatorship. My reasons are that if we were under an anarchy, America would be chaotic. Even with the government that we currently have, the crime rate is pretty high and if we had no ruling at all, the crime rate would skyrocket and America would no longer be a safe place to live. At least with a dictatorship we would have some sort of control over us to keep us all in line.
By
suzieq:), at 7:36 PM
Anarchy would be better than a dictatorship for a number of reasons. First off, I will assume that you are asking which I would rather be living in- anarchy or dictatorship. This would mean that the American, state, and local governments have all collapsed and I am stuck in suburbia. The first point that I will address is that anarchy is temporary, where as a dictatorship can last over a generation. If anarchy was to happen today, it leaves space for local governments to fill the power vacuum. Government would naturally, albeit slowly, reestablish themselves. In the anarchist scenario, anarchy would last for maybe 5-10 years before local governments began to reestablish. In a dictatorship, the dictator could be in power for 50 years, and then possibly have a successor. Some may argue that a good dictator would give up his power and that a government could be reestablished that way, and I can think of only one system in which the dictator is naturally supposed to give up power. That system is Communism, the catch is that in perfect communism, there is no government and the people live in a state of anarchy. Historically there is a great example of a successful sort of anarchist society. The so called “wild west” was not a perfectly anarchist society, but was very close to one. It was, however, actually not so wild at all, with crime rates actually lower than they are today. Muggings and personal crimes that happened, were usually the result of the mug (person getting mugged) being drunk, and bragging about how much money he had on him. Later he was jumped as he stumbled home in the dark. Banks were not robbed, seeing as though the tellers were armed, and when stagecoaches were robbed, only the express box was taken, and the passengers were treated well to keep them from turning into vigilantes. Some great inventions came out of this anarchist state as well including blue jeans, dynamite, and the colt revolver. There is one main sort of anarchist state today that everyone participates in. The internet is as of now in an anarchist state where people are free to do whatever they want on. I’m sure that anyone in favor of a dictatorship must want the net to be governed by some central body free to shut down sites as it pleases, but how could anyone advocate that? It can't be denied that Anarchy is superior to a Dictatorship.
By
PG-13, at 9:51 PM
I believe that tyranny would the better choice than an anarchy because people are natural killers that will do anything they can to get what they need. There would be widespread chaos in a world of anarchy, while in a world of tyranny at least there would be some form of order. People that think that government is corrupt and an anarchy would be best, well so is every individual. We are all corrupt in our own way, and the chances of one person that controls a whole country to be abusive and corrupt of power is 50/50. I much rather take those odds than about 90% of people in the US to be abusive of power
By
football42, at 4:24 AM
If having to choose between the two I would say Tyranny, because in a state with no rules there would simply just be chaos. In a world where anarchy was our main form of government there would be no rules, no leader, and nothing to tell people what is right and what is wrong.
By
smayhew93, at 4:35 AM
Tyranny would be a better form of government because there is some sort of structure. However with anarchy there is very little social order and rules in society. Therefore with a tyranny, there would be more control
By
jhallowell, at 6:42 AM
I definitely think tyranny. I would much rather a strict dictatorship with laws and punishments for breaking them than complete chaos. At least in dictatorship, everything is usually civilized and organized.
By
cwatson, at 1:56 PM
A dictatorship would be better for our society. People are naturally bad, and without rules and regulations there would be chaos. A stong central leader (dictator) would give the people stability and guidence, which is ultimately needed for a succesful society.
By
Katie_Dunn, at 5:39 PM
if i had to choose between a anarchy and a dictatorship, i would choose a dictatorship in a heart beat. if we were to live in an anarchy our society would crumble, after all people are too selfish and self absorbed that everyone would only have the best interest in themselves, making it kind a "every man for himself" society - which would be a disaster. people are just designed to be controlled, now how we are controlled is a different story but overall we need structure and discipline in order to thrive.
By
domdotcom, at 6:45 PM
I think that in America a dictatorship would be better. I think since we already focus on one strong political leader it would be easy for us to follow the rule of one person. A strong figurehead at the front of the government might be what we need in order to fix some of the problems that we are facing in this country. I feel like if we gave Americans the free will that goes with anarchy our country would become just as corrupt as some of the other countries that we try to fix. People might feel the need to rebel and do crazy things in an anarchy just because they can.
By
SNathans93, at 3:55 AM
Anarchy vs. Dictatorship: neither choice is particularly appealing. But in the face of pure chaos and the prospect of living in constant fear for your physical being, I would chose a Dictatorship over Anarchy. When there is no system of control then those who have the ability and the resources to take advantage of others will do so. In anarchy those born with a stonger physique will generally be able to defend their property better and those who are weaker will live in constant fear. That isn't to say dictatorship wouldn't be a terrifying circumstance to live under. Dictatorship is a different kind of fear: mental. Fear of expressing your opionions or differing from government policy. However you'd live in a structured society where those stronger than you can't take advantage of that. And if the Dictator isn't a tyrant then the state that he governs may be a pleasant fair place to live.
By
Lauren Telschow, at 6:52 AM
Tyranny would be the better form of government to have. There are set rules for the people to follow yet room for people to slip up. A dictatorship would be too hard and curel on the people.
By
ktlown, at 7:14 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home