Anarchy

I look forward to this debate. For the record I would like to state that I am neither for or against an anarchist society. My point here is that I don't feel it could ever truly be sustained as a society, even if I wanted it to. I will let the readers decide if they agree. - ROUND 1 ARGUMENT - In my opinion, Anarchy is not sustainable as a society structure for a large group of people. P1 - Any individual or group of individuals that has the power of resources, will always have a certain degree of control over those individuals that do not have the power of resources. This gives the people who have the power of resources power and authority. P2 - Anarchy doesn't exist in our current world because it can't sustain itself. Even in ancient times they developed tribes out of anarchy. Now, these tribes would have logically seen two things. 1. ) That natural leaders were amongst the group. Those that were stronger, smarter, etc. 2. ) That other weaker people in the group would submit to the will or requests of these individuals, due to there natural status of power. (This behavior can even be seen amongst animals. .. Lions,wolves,etc. ) Tribes, gangs, etc. are just small governments in essence. A leader is in place that has the authority over what happens in the group or "society". This leader can have many labels, but in essence forms very similarly in his/her role as leader. Labels for these leaders have meant many different things throughout the ages, depending on the structure of order that is involved. Some of these labels are chief, king, commander, president, etc. Now, a tribe that grows to the size of a country is no different from a tribe that stays the size of a small forest. It is still a framework of order and leadership that we have come to call a government system in the modern era. (And by modern I mean the last few thousand years or so. ) This is one form of government system that would inevitably rise out of any group of people that form a society together. This form of governing system is called Tribal Council. Tribal Council – The governing body for certain tribes within the United States or elsewhere (since ancient times). I point this out only because this is the natural order of things when it comes to people that group together as a society. P3 - How will the anarchist society defend itself against foreign invaders that are unified and organized in structure? Any scenario of anarchy defending itself towards a unified order is flawed with inefficiency in my opinion. 1. ) How are these little pockets of defense going to acquire the resources to fight such a war or develop the needed weaponry? In order to acquire these resources collectively and form an organized resistance effort, it would take some form of government structure. You can't fight a unified group of order against multiple un-unified unorganized small defense forces to win. It would be like fighting the US military against all the street gangs of America. If a society does not have a structure of order and authority in the realm of defense then it will be toppled by a society that does. The entire history of mankind proves my words right. There is a reason why any society that even remotely resembled an anarchist society has been overthrown by a unified force. If my opponent refuses to acknowledge this, then I request proof from anywhere in history. Prove that an anarchist society has ever toppled and replaced a unified society at some point in history. I think this would be quite hard, because there are no anarchist societies anywhere in the world. 2. ) Further, who would decide when and where to attack in an anarchist society? When and where to defend? How many soldiers go where? Etc. .. etc. .. There must be some form of governing council that has authority over the defense and decisions of the society as a whole. Tell me how an anarchist society would defend itself without a governing council. A governing council is a form of government. Call it a democracy or a republic, whatever. It's all the same in proving that the structure of anarchy can only exist as a temporary one. P4. Who will enforce order and rules in the anarchist society? Each person or family will hire a private defense force? How will they pay for this? Even if they do pay for a private defense force. .. Does that mean that if I have more money I have more power of authority? Of course it does. If I could hire a larger defense force, then I could build one myself with that kind of money or resources. Then I could enforce whatever laws I want and kill the people that oppose me. If another private defense force gets in my way. .. Then we shall have war. This scenario has already played out in ages past. We called these areas Kingdoms. These kingdoms were ruled by kings (private defense force leader or owner) and they enforced their law with an army (private defense force). Even in today's society, we have gangs and gang leaders which control certain areas of the world. This is very similar to what it was like in the time of kings, just with a slightly different twist. Take away the police force and national military, and it would be my bet that gangs (groups of people) would be the new powers of authority and soon enough wars would break out. After that, a large unified gang (group of people) would stand together and try to put the area into the order of one unified authority. It is the natural way of things. And as an individual, I could just kill you if you have the resources I need. .. Who would stop me in an anarchist society? I have more to say, but I am running out of time. I will let my opponent make his argument. Thank you for your time.