Discussion No Rules

[sserafim]

How do you think a world with no rules would be like? Would anarchy ever work, or is it too idealistic to ever be implemented into reality?

I think any form of chaos would be like one big prison, those strong enough take from those weaker and so on. What would stop that? Not that current society is grand but the idea of a world of individuals working in some unselfish way seems like a big pipe dream. Life's just a question of who's screwing you, how hard, and will they hug you afterwards.

What are your thoughts on this comment?

 

[surroundedbydemons]

He is right that the chaos will eventually converge to a more stable structure.

 

[sserafim]

He is right that the chaos will eventually converge to a more stable structure.

Wdym

True. Even though I don't like society, law and order keep people's animalistic nature in check. They exist to control people, and people need to be controlled. If society collapsed, then it would be a free for all. The idea of a world of individuals working in some unselfish way *is* too good to be true. It'll never happen. People are greedy, selfish and self-interested by nature. There will never be a utopia. In a world with no rules, the strong *would* dominate the weak. It would be like the animal kingdom. It would be like The Purge everyday

What do you think?

 

[surroundedbydemons]

Wdym

Literally, I guess?...

What is your question?

 

[sserafim]

Literally, I guess?...

What is your question?

How will the chaos converge into a more stable structure? I know that societies inevitably organize themselves into hierarchies, even in the animal kingdom. Is this what you're talking about? Leaders will emerge out of the chaos?

 

[surroundedbydemons]

How will the chaos converge into a more stable structure?

Because I do not understand why it shouldn't

So, more like, what makes you think anarchy will work?

What do you think?

Same as my first comment. But instead of it being "The Purge" every day, the level of anarchy will gradually decline

 

[sserafim]

Because I do not understand why it shouldn't

So, more like, what makes you think anarchy will work?

Same as my first comment. But instead of it being "The Purge" every day, the level of anarchy will gradually decline

Why do you think the level of anarchy will gradually decline? In a world with no rules, there would be no consequences or punishment. People could get away with anything. Law and order exists to control people and keep them subservient. Without laws, people would show their true nature (of selfishness and self-interest)

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/any-anarchists-here-how-do-you-practice-it.152919/

 

[surroundedbydemons]

Why do you think the level of anarchy will gradually decline? In a world with no rules, there would be no consequences or punishment. People could get away with anything. Law and order exists to control people and keep them subservient. Without laws, people would show their true nature (of selfishness and self-interest)

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/any-anarchists-here-how-do-you-practice-it.152919/

Thank you for bringing up that thread. I think people there generally provide a good complex explanation.

I will provide a simple explanation:
There is person A and person B. They are competing for a resource, a bush of berries, for example.
Let's say person A loses to person B. Person B now owns the bush. Ok, that works.
Now, there are also person C and person D. They decide to team up and gang up on person B. Person C and person D own the bush....

There is a group A and group B. Group A has the rules, and group B lives in anarchy. They are competing for a field of bushes.
Group A beats group B because group B is not organized, but group A has structure. Now group A owns the field.
Group B will not unite by themselves to beat group A because group B has no rules.


What are your thoughts on this?

 

[Agon321]

Anarchy does not work in the long term and makes no sense.
Anarchy can only "work" for a short time.
Of course, this is not pleasant.
It certainly wouldn't be a peaceful life.

Sooner or later some person/group of people/government/whatever will take control and the anarchy will end.

Anarchy is a naive system.
If you complain about your life now, it will be even worse during anarchy.

 

[Pluto]

 

[KillingPain267]

How do you think a world with no rules would be like? Would anarchy ever work, or is it too idealistic to ever be implemented into reality?

What are your thoughts on this comment?

There is a difference between no rules and no enforcement of rules.

The comment is just pessimism for the status quo. It's basically just "a pipe dream, so let's not even TRY to work towards a better world". It's like when people just 300 years ago would say that abolishing slavery entirely is a pipe dream.

 

[xinino]

Chaos and equality can coexist, exploitation of resources is what makes people superior, the world in pre-agriculture is a perfect example, nature made almost all people equal. because material conditions without exploitation "agriculture" allowed people to be equal. Also, the concept of dominance itself was almost nonexistent in people's psyches simply because the physical world did not allow this concept to even be thinkable. The recreation of these circumstances now is impossible, thus equality under chaos is impossible.

I think the world we are now living in is reflection of the mainstream's psyche, so as long as we think rationalIy there will be rules, world without rules needs irrationality "specifically without neocortex in brain", so we have to do things without plausable reasons to create such world.

Anarchism is stateless cummunity organized by rules but just less oppressive or more considerable about individuals.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

Humans generally require some sort of set of rules or morals to follow for us to get along with each other. Rules are something that will always exist in for that reason. Anarchism refers to a stateless community. Even under anarchism there will also have to be a set of rules to follow, hence anarchist law.

Anarchist law - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I'm personally not the most knowledgeable on anarchism and I do plan on taking more time to read up on it, but based on the bits I know about it, there are quite a few aspects of it that I find myself agreeing with. Still, there is no such thing as community without rules because humans always have some sort of set of rules that must be followed in order for us to be able to live with each other. It isn't about rules vs no rules, but rather it's about what said rules are, where do they come from, how are they to be implemented, and whether or not they are beneficial to the community. It's also about making sure that said rules apply to everyone, not just a particular group of people (particularly the marginalized).

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

If the only rule is no rules, then eventually somebody will realize they're allowed to create rules because the no rules rule isn't a real rule but a ruse.

 

[CTB Dream]

Wrld wrk unvrs rule no human rule rly brutl unvrs ,unvrs chaos human species no undrstd

 

[joeschmo]

How do you think a world with no rules would be like? Would anarchy ever work, or is it too idealistic to ever be implemented into reality?

What are your thoughts on this comment?

Anarchy is *always* going to lead to another society, we are social animals, it's in our instincts to seek order, which means some form of government.

Anyways, so there was this cool dude named Jacque Fresco from "The Venus Project", he spend many decades trying to figure out how to implement a governmental system that is better than any before, one that is primarily run by AI (like an advanced quantum computer). He said that unfortunately because of the way pll are currently programmed and the type of governmental system we have in place, humanity might need to go through the worst type of depression globally before humans finally decide to try something new.

Instead of explaining everything he said, I highly highly recommend the following: https://www.thevenusproject.com/learn-more/documentaries/

 

[thenamingofcats]

This reminds me of Slab City

Slab City, California - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think how things pan out would be very different depending on the environment and culture of the place. Like the geographical environment and what the values of the people were before anarchy, even generations back.
Conflict is the human condition and people are constantly trying to get away from it. I think constant violence is less likely to be the norm than some kind of social structure, probably a hierarchy.

 

[DarkRange55]

What do @sserafim and @SmallKoy think?

 

[Grav]

How do you think a world with no rules would be like? Would anarchy ever work, or is it too idealistic to ever be implemented into reality?

What are your thoughts on this comment?

I think that people are selfish at their base, helping others just to help I believe has more to do with social conditioning and ego rewards than inherent kindness outside of one's kin group. Anarchy (not the jimmy high school "do whatever man") requires people fighting their selfishness to come together to do things, but they have to see the benefit. Example: roads. All agree good roads are good for people, but how/when/why they are maintained is up for debate. The guy with 4 wheel drive doesn't need smooth roads but granny in a new rolls does want them; why should the guy pay for road work he doesn't need right now? Fine he doesn't. Now granny pays more and when truck guy wants something she's not going to "retaliate"? So to make it fair you now have to coerce truck guy (violence, fines, shaming, social credits, etc) so it's not really anarchy then is it?
When it comes to chaos and everyone doing what they like the base kin group will bond to defend itself, the bigger the group the bigger your "army". Reality: lone women, the elderly, and kids will be prey items, just like in the animal world. Stronger people can make demands for their protection. Those strong enough to take, will. Those weaker will form groups to defend themselves from the takers, then no more "chaos world". Survival of the fittest and the strong rule will be the order of the day. Weapons start to level the playing field but that leads to others as takers and defenders. People like the idea of no rules but when you ask them about the ugly side of humanity or just animal natures they tend to back off it. When these things come up I think of Homer Simpson, "In theory Communism works". The world could and probably should be more "fair" but fair requires being unfair to others because my middle income view of fair is not the poor person's or the rich person's.