Where do you land?

[Dunkopf]

If there was no govt, life would be a lot like the Mad Max series of movies. People would band together to survive. It would be like living in the west before the white man destroyed the Indians way of life. People from another tribe would come and attack your tribe to get something they wanted or just for fun. Life would be grand.

I would rather have civilization and elected officials instead of the most ruthless person in charge.

 

[nonseq]

I am right smack on the line between Liberal and Libertarian. Which is where I fall on every one of these types of quizzes. I am a Liberal Libertarian. woot

 

[nonseq]

 

[Q9]

Quote:
I agree - to an extent. Some government is necessary, the intention being to prevent infringements on rights. One person's rights end where they infringe on another's, you get what I'm saying? I can't carry a gun onto someone's property if they don't want it, as that would be a violation of property rights. A very small amount of government is necessary to enforce laws built around this principle, and to prevent other nations from forcing their governments on us. That, after all, is the purpose of a military force.

However, in some unique scenarios, it is possible to be perfectly safe with no formal government at all. The cattle town of Abilene (which earned a reputation as one of the wilder towns), in the first two years of its existence, experienced no homicides. The next year, when formal government, that is, sheriffs, first came, that's when the killing started. Even then, it was very little.

During the California Gold Rush, there was no formal government, but the miners organized citizen courts that routinely settled claim disputes. Claim-jumping, too, was rare. It seems like a nightmare scenario - thousands of men who don't know each other, are armed, looking to get rich, and are not intending to stay, with no formal government. Somehow, though, they made it work. (Just FYI, there WERE military outposts in California at that point, but they didn't have the men or the inclination to do any form of enforcement.)

Now, I don't think anarchy would work now - with a population this big we need formal courts and a military.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Quote:
No there has been a US government since 1776. It does not have control of all of its territory to this day. Many places even in the USA still dont have or want paved roads, schools, cops an all the other things that come with government. But the big place people chose to live a free life is international waters.

People these days expect government to take care of everything including raising there kids.

In a low on no government system you can't not work an live off everyone else. You will starve to death. An anyone that doesn't follow basic human curtsies quickly finds there self confronted with a linch mob.

People think Anarchy means everyone can do what ever they want but in reality everyone has to treat everyone else better. Sorry people dont live long. People have to work together an if your not nice an respectable an dont have a good reputation they you find your self in a bad spot.

Rape someones wife of kid, get hanged in the woods by the locals.
When you get away from the movies an thin about real life crime is lower in a little or no government set up because the penalties are high. The penalties for not being respectable is high to.

In this day an time you need to regulate defeance of the country. Beyond that the government should stay completely out of the affairs of its people.

Government to defend its people is good. Government to rule its people is bad.

People argue that government caused equal rights an abolished slavery. But it didn't. Public opinion changed over time an that did. Then once the majority believed it was right the government followed. At the most the government cut a few years out of the proses.

People that have to find for them selves an survive on there know how an especially live with there mistakes are better people for it. Sure its harder but nothing worth having comes easy. An if it did you wouldn't appreciate it enough to know.

 

[farmerlor]

Are we really romanticizing lynch mobs here? Seriously? One of the reasons to have a judicial system is to determine if the guy really did rape someone's wife before the wrong guy gets hanged.
And no, I don't believe that most people want the government to take care of everything including raising their children. Most of the people I know (and I'm a hardcore, flag waving liberal) want the government out of their personal lives. We don't want the government interfering with who we can make personal contracts with (same sex marriage), we don't want the government standing between us and decisions we make with our doctors (abortion and end of life decisions), we don't want the government deciding how our children are raised though we do want them educated and if other countries can arrange to educate children through college at no cost to the parents we certainly should be able to figure that out too. Where I come from the government is supposed to be responsible for the safety of it's citizenry not their morals or their beliefs.
It's important to help people who are down on their luck for a brief period of time so that they in turn can become contributing members of society and help the next poor soul who needs a little help. It is NOT necessary to help people who will not help themselves EVER.

 

[joebryant]

Everyone needs to look at those people who are on welfare and/or government subsidies and ask themselves if they, themselves, would give them a job. If the answer is a resounding NO, then we must all ask ourselves if we want them to die of starvation or God knows what illnesses.
If they are capable and mentally fit, I'd say work or starve or die; however, close investigation usually finds them as being someone who's unfit for any kind of employment.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Not romanticizing anything.


Just responding to this comment.

You might think different with todays generations seem to just be getting dumber and dumber, less educated, takes longer for the vass majority to think properly on their own and mature if ever I am starting to wonder etc....you would have teenage kids in your neck of the woods with a glock just shooting at random cause they can. No one working cause they don't have to or no reason too. Everyone would just exist.

Justice system you are talking about pre dated government. It is at play in most non governmental communitys.​

 

[Dunkopf]

Quote:
Justice system you are talking about pre dated government. It is at play in most non governmental communitys.

You mean like the Reverend Jim Jones and his community. Or are you referring to those African tribes a prior poster was talking about. Or maybe the communities in Salem that burned witches. I believe that was after we declared ourselves a country

I agree that the government is a bit intrusive. They waste way too much money on defense. They have all these fancy stand off weapons so we can go to war with minimum casualties. Problem is that if it isn't worth our young men dying for it than why are we doing it. At any rate only about 1% of the population if that, wants to live in the woods with no public services at all. So maybe the country should just annex a section somewhere and call it no mans land. No taxes except to pay for defense and any wars we may need to wage, no roads, no utilities, no nothing. Then everyone can go wild. Have a Tea Party or something.

We weren't

 

[Candiss]

Libertarian, I thought I would lean more towards liberal.

Candace