Oppressive government is more desirable than no government.

And no need to apologize; we all have lives outside of DDO, and the post was written within the time limit. In this debate, the argument is on which is better, an oppressive government or no government at all. I shall presume by oppressive government, we mean a state, a territorial monopoly on law and coercive force, with an oppressive state being one that is blatantly attacking the rights of the citizens within the territory and anarchy being the lack of a state in a given area. I am to argue that anarchy is better than an oppressive state, but I shall start by trying to give the benefits of anarchy by themselves before introducing comparisons between anarchy and an oppressive state next round. My criterion shall also be utility based, however it is based on the utility of individuals within an area, not on a mass utility aggregate of people living in an area. My defense of anarchy as a socio-political system is two-fold; the natural order that arises in anarchy is more in keeping with the wishes of all the people, and the peaceful order that comes in between disparate groups when neither can be considered a ruling group, as well as the peace between individuals. The natural order that is observed in different anarchic cultures is polycentric law, which is law based on the decision of judges by a case-by-case basis, ruling in favor of what the people considered just. This form of polycentric law lasts today in Somalia with their common, polycentric law the xeer (heer), and lasted at least 1000 years in Ireland from 600 CE (when christian monks landed) to 1640 CE when Oliver Cromwell finally conquered the Irish. The Irish law was the filid, and it was brought about by private judges separate from the political bodies that existed. Justice was done primarily by a system of sureties and restitution; all crimes were debts owed to the victim, whether it was a late payment, a theft, an assault, even a murder (the xeer deals with most crimes this way as well). The sureties in Ireland were based on either what an individual himself could pledge or one other"s pledging their assurance of the debtor"s ability, and staking their property on it. In the case of a poor man claiming a richer man did him injustice, there was a custom to bring him to judgement court or else to be considered outlaw by the community, which would mean a loss of all legal status and rights. [1] The xeer had slightly different methods; its more kinship oriented polycentric law is based around the decisions of clan elders, oday, who are elected by family members for their impartiality. When dealing with other clans, because of reasons of peace and commerce and the non-geographical nature of the clans (in many places they overlap), the odays attempt to be impartial; if they are not unanimous, they ask a third-party oday to step in who shan"t benefit from a decision either way (other than increasing his reputation for impartiality). The xeer does have a death-sentence for highly dangerous people, and also has non-state police; however, if a person acting as a policeman or oday is convicted of a crime, their clan pays twice the price of the crime. [2] Those two examples show that law can be administered in a non-arbitrary way that is considered just by all people involved. Now, I shall move on to another point; peace between individuals and between groups (by extension). Human"s are both self-centered and social animals; even charitable humans do so because they want to be helpful in some way, a want that is self-centered in nature (feeling good is a self-centered, and admirable, one of these reasons). Without the coercive power of state-ship, all humans have to cooperate if they are to maintain sanity, let alone a more productive life from the division of labor or communal efforts. It is a desire among humans to feel the praise of the group, as stated by Maslow when he created his hierarchy of needs (not a true hierarchy, but still a true list of needs). [3] The desire to be liked and the self-centered way humans view the world means that, without a state, the only legitimate way to gain wealth is in a way that does not infringe upon others. Even if considering a more communal association of individuals, those that hurt the group would be outcasts seeking to be back in the good graces of the group (or sociopaths that quickly get left out). It may be true that, with small groups, this would lead to a great deal of conformity (you are either in or out, as those who went to school with a very small group for a period of time may tell you), but as the body of people gets larger, and people can effectively choose friends from hundreds or more people, Dunbar"s number appears; it is a phenomena discovered first in anthropology and transferred to sociology stating that people can only maintain between 150-250 relationships at any given time. [4] With this in mind, people choose friends based on what they like, believe, etc. However, the overall ideas of justice remain secure because 1. You want other groups to respect your autonomy and 2. You will not accept another group"s willingness to break the frame of order. As such, the diversification of friends and support groups leads to even greater degrees of peace, prosperity, and order, as stated by Emile Durkheim in contrast to the Weber or Marxist interpretations that the haves must always be coercing the have-nots be fact of having. [5]. So, anarchy is possible of maintaining peace by itself as well as providing a means of physiological and social means without a group "above" the rest, and thus an opportunity at higher functions can exist; while this does not by itself make it the best system ever, it does show its validity and does show that, for individuals, under a scale of utility in which each human seeks to maximize happiness, anarchy is a more plausible way for each individual to attain greater utility maximization than an oppressive state that no longer even tries to protect rights, but actually ends them, and thus the better option. I await Pro"s response. Sources: [1] . http://peacerequiresanarchy.wordpress.com... [2]. http://mises.org... [3]. http://www.simplypsychology.org... [4]. http://www.businessweek.com... [5]. http://highered.mheducation.com...