How do you counter the argument that in an anarchistic society a big thug will arise to become the Ruler?
I know that it is a silly objection because that is already the situation we find ourselves in: The strongest, least ethical, monsters have set themselves up as "our government" and made rules that protect themselves to our detriment. I also realize that a fully armed population, willing to defend themselves from tyrants, is the remedy to this, but few people will accept that.
This is the objection to liberty that I find most difficult to dispell, even though I don't believe it myself. How do you convince people, who base their entire lives on this premise, that they are wrong?
BULLY: "Hi everyone, I am your new ruler."
ReplyDeleteEVERYONE ELSE: "Fuck off."
BULLY: "I have a bunch of people with guns who'll shoot you if you don't obey me."
EVERYONE ELSE: "Okay, that's a threat of murder. We will now act in self-defense. Goodbye!" *Five hundred people shoot bully in various parts of his body*
That follows pretty closely what Sunni said on my Haloscan comments.
ReplyDelete