In class, we talked about four visions of anarchy, life without government, and the origins of government -- this included Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, and Kropotkin.
Kropotkin offered one vision of anarchy. For him, life without government would be far less coercive and far more cooperative. For example, we can see examples of this kind of anarchy in the case of Belgium, which has been without a government for around 500 days [read about it here, here, and here]. Also, the wild west during the American frontier days was anarchical and apparently less violent than some American cities today. There are also a number of anarchist communities that have existed. Radical Christians, for instance, peacefully and voluntarily live in anarchical communties today.
Hobbes offered another vision of anarchy. For him, life without government was nasty brutish, and short. It was men against men in an all out struggle to survive -- and because of this constant struggle, there would be little wealth, little learning, few grand structures, little clothing, and no commerce. For example, we can see this vision of anarchy played out in places like Karachi, Pakistan. Somalia is another example. It has been without a centralized government since 1991 and is consistently ranked as the worst failed state in the world with 20% of its population living as political refugees. Like slum lords building houses in Karachi or the businessmen opening hospitals in Somalia, some people are making money and benefiting from the lack of government, but life is pretty hard for a large number of people.
What do you think?
Which vision of anarchy do you think is most likely to occur? Are people likely to voluntarily cooperate, as in Belgium? Or, do you think that people are more likely to engage in an all out struggle, as in Somalia? Or do you think something else? Tell me: What do you think life without government would be like? Does life without government have something to offer that a governed life does not?
Life without government would be brutish and short like Hobbes said because of the lack of security that would be presented to the ungoverned people. There would be enormous struggles and no economy to produce money. Having an established government brings the people together because we are all following traditions and rules that provide a sense of the security for US. The United States is soo powerful because of the millions of people in different workplaces coming together to contribute to the economy to protect the people- For example. the court systems, banks, law enforcement, mailing systems, etc without government their would be absolutely no unity! And unity builds a strong nation
ReplyDeleteWhat class section are you in?
DeleteMWF 9:10-10:00 WH 304
DeleteI agree with Phillip here. I think that although people complain about the government and how we would be so much better without it, the world would be complete chaos. With Hobbes' theory of a government creating security and order, a nation grows. If we had no government we would have no money, no social class structure, and no way of protecting our homeland.
DeletePSCI 100.02
I agree with Phillip and Lauren on this matter. Yes, the governemt may do things that we don't like but we have to rememeber that without the governemet we may not be here. With Hobbes' theory and creating security it allows us to be in this world.
DeletePSCI 100.02
I agree with Phillip on the fact that life would be very difficult and chaotic without a government. Hobbe’s theory is a good example of what to have because without the security society would act out of hand. With a government the people would be in a panic state of mind because there are no set laws to live by. Another problem that would arise without government being present is the resources would not be distributed evenly throughout the people.
DeleteAshlea McKenzie PSCI 100-02
When I think of anarchy, I think of something similar to what Kropotkin believed in. People instinctively help others which is why I believe that if something happened to the United States or the world today, we would be able to survive. Yes, there will be fighting over who gets what or who had what, but I think that the general population would stop the fighting because they would realize that we are only hurting ourselves by killing each other. Maybe this is me wanting to believe that people are better than they actually are but people have a general understanding to help others in need. I like life with government because I can walk down the street knowing that if there was an accident or I did not feel safe, I could call the Shepherd Police Department and they would come. As much as people complain about the government, it will never be perfect because humans are imperfect. But it keeps us safe. For example, when 9/11 occurred, no one thought that something like that would happen to the United States, but it did. Now security is tighter and we are better prepared if something like that would happen again.
ReplyDelete-Sarah Myers, Section 100.03
When I think of anarchy I firmly side with Thomas Hobbes approach. I think that it would be an everyman for themselves kind of ordeal. It makes sense for man to invent state and church for order. The fear of Hell keeps you in line while the promise of heaven keeps you on the straight and narrow. I think it would be complete and utter chaos. It would be a man fighting for what they feel is there’s with no regards to other people. I just feel like as human beings we only look out for ourselves anyway and when something occurs were looking out for our own best interest. It would be a struggle to survive in such a crucial environment.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with this as well. Like what we talked about in class, we create the state and church to keep us on that middle ground inbetween and if that ever fell apart man would fight for himself and no one else.
DeleteIn American, at least at first, everyone would be in a panic. People would be flipping out saying "ohh no, what shall we do without goverment!!!"(Stump's voice). After an amount of time I think America would start dividing up into seperate goverments because people want protection! The first thing I would do is try and be prepared for luter's. Some how another goverment would be formed, it is in an American's nature to be governed.
ReplyDeleteCody Barrett 100.02
True, but what if you have a large amount of people who don't want to be "governed". Then what would come since there is no set government to step in and take control?
DeleteI agree with Cody, i feel at first there would be a little panic and maybe slight chaos but not to the extent of every man for himself. There hasnt been a fall of government (not in my life time at least)that has occured in the U.S. People like having a sense of power because they like know what to do and whats considered right and wrong i.e. laws and regulations. Within communities or packs there would be at least one, maybe more that takes control and people work together for the better good of their families and life.
DeleteI strongly agree with Hobbes analysis on government. Without the government I do believe that this world would come to an utter distruction. I know now alot of Americans today complain about all the taxes that are being taken out of their pay checks, including myself. But when we sit back and think about all the things that we have accommodating us it makes alot of sense why we pay taxes. Nothing in this world is free, things aren't just given to you. The government has to have a way of providing you with things.... money. It doesn't just grow on trees, it would be nice but it just doesn't.
ReplyDeleteSadly, I don't believe that people are generally to cooperate. NOT ALL but most people in the United States have to be PUSHED in order to do something or have some type of ground rules set. Without the rules people are free to do whatever they wish and god only knows what the world would come to if that were to happpen. In reality we have some really stupid people living out in this world, sad, but true.
When it comes down to it.... just follow the rules. Its not that hard. Don't be dramatic about it. Rules do suck, but its called life. The Government does alot for us, in ways alot of people don't come to realize.
Mariah Bacon MWF 9:10-10:00
Anthony Varbero TR 12:25-1:40 sec. 100.3
DeleteI agree with Mariah. Without government, this world would be in utter destruction. With taxes, US makes some sort of law to have control over us in term of taxes. There are rules set for a reason and we have to follow them or there will be consequences. We do not give enough credit for what the government does for us.
I think that at first everything would be utter panic. After being used to the same thing for so long (having a government) and it being taken away, many people would get scared and start worrying about what's going to happen. In my opinion, I think it would be a little of both theories. I think that America would be far more cooperative due to the fact that people would understand that something needs to be done, and since there isn't a government to do that for us anymore, we have to do it for ourselves and the only way to get by is to help one another and cooperate together to achieve accomplishments, stay alive, and live an everyday life without struggle. On the other hand, I do also believe that in some ways America would be like "The Road." Not all humans are the same. In that, they do not all believe or think the same things either. I'm willing to bet that not all people in this country would be willing to cooperate with others. We are simple just to diverse. I believe that if we had no government, America as it is known now, would fail to exist. Although I don't always believe in all the rules, laws, and decisions set out by the government, I am thankful that we do have such to maintain the outrage that would exist without one.
ReplyDeleteAshlee Barrett 100.02
When I think of anarchy I think similarly to what Kropotkin believed. People help each other everyday without being told to do so. If the United States government were to fall, we could still survive. It's instinctive for individuals to work together during times of need. It would start with panic and arguing about what to do next but I do think the population would come together and survive with little violence.
ReplyDeleteJena Wright 100:03
MWF 9:10-10:00 WH 304
Deletei agree with Jena, I think that if the government were to fall it would not cause compltete chaos. It wouldn't take long for people to come together and work with one another to survive. There wouldn't be a matter of man vs man or an all out war.
I lean more towards Kropotkin's thoughts on anarchism. I feel that when people are put in a situation where they become accountable for their own actions and must fight for survival they will more than likely come together to help each other. Any form of society has those that act maliciously, we have them even now with a government in control. I don't feel that it would be so much worse without a government. Criminals will always be present and no type of jail will discourage them from acting out. However, if there were no government and people choose to work together to function then there would be those who would protect their communities and criminals would be less inclined to act under the threat of death.
ReplyDeleteI believe it would most likely be a combination of several of the theories. I agree with Aristotle in the sense that humans tend to come together and form government. As we discussed in class his first level of government is the family followed by the village. I feel that many families of a like mind would come together and offer mutual aid to one another, forming small villages, as Kropotkin suggested.
ReplyDeleteI also feel, however, Hobbes' idea of a brutish life is also likely. I think it would not be all out man vs man conflict, i think it is more likely to be many of the small groups of families fighting over resources and safety. I think if anarchy ever reigned we would immediately see the formation of roaming gangs seeking supplies and taking whatever they want from anyone they can overpower.
So all in all i think none of the philosophers had the complete picture, but combined paint a good picture of life without government.
Michael Ryan Rodgers. 100.03 TR 12:25 - 1:40
I think that in the case of America, Hobbes' theory would be more relevant in heavily populated areas while Kropotkin's theory would hold true to more rural areas. In places like Baltimore, DC, New York City, people are grouped so closely together and rely on technology more than social interaction. However, out in the middle of Montana, people seem more able to live off the land, use their resources, and not place so much dependence on the government. It could truly depend on how involved the government is in the lives of the people it secures. That's why I believe that more industrialized places would be greatly affected versus those that are not. This is not the case with Somalia, but for the United States it seems like a reasonable assumption.
ReplyDeletePaige Albert PSCI 100.03
I feel like life without government would a mix between the Hobbes and Kropotkin theories of anarchy. At first peopel would be in a panic,a panic of how am I to survive without structure? Anything new, at least in the begining offers some sort of fear of the unknown or fear of what is to be expected. But after some time, and a routine is set, people would come together, voluntarily, like in Kropotkin's theory. They would see others as allies and work together to survive, like when setting up a new colony.
ReplyDeleteLife with no goverment does offer more freedom. It allows people to do what they will- whether that is good or bad. Without government, there is no one to tell you what to do. So naturally people would feel more at ease because if they wanted to do something, they could, just because they wanted to. (even if they would never do what they are doing under anarchy, under government, just having that sense of freedom makes people feel more at ease.)
I believe that in America it would be more like Hobbes' version. Every man for himself, and I believe that it would be an all out struggle to survive. I think that some people would ban together and give each other mutual aid like Kropotkin says but I do not believe that this would be enough to stop the horrors that would insue if we were faced with the collapse of our government or a mojor natural disaster. When there is no security people will not be safe. I don't think that most Americans would just continue on with there jobs I believe that we are too convinced as a society that the apocalypse is comming and we need to prepare. So with this in many people's minds I think everyone would start looting and violence would be prevalent.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Hobbes' theory would be the most likely way that America would be. All against all is seems like it would occur faster than everyone coming together creating mutual aid. I feel like more people would rather fend for their selves and have their own fears rather than attempting to form a group where they cannot trust the person beside them. Either way, there are going to be fears that people will have to face, but in Hobbes' theory, the people at least get to protect themselves instead of worrying about what the other around them are doing.
ReplyDeletePeople do tend to worry more about themselves than others and I completely agree with you about life without government.
DeleteIn the world that we live in now I agree with Hobbes theory. People that live today are very greedy and selfish. Most people don't agree with how the government works now so I don't see many people trying to offer mutual aid. I think our world would be completely different without a government. Like you said it class our country seems to be filled with violent, angry people and violence is what it would be without any type of government.
ReplyDeleteMcKena Munson PSCI 100.03
I believe that life without government would be like Hobbes view. Without government there would be no stability and no law. How can you control a world of people with no boundaries? The keyword in this type of lifestyle would be "Fear". Every man would be against each other. People would be just like animals like Hobbes stated, because we were born with no care. We had to be taught right from wrong. Life would with no doubt be nasty, brutish, and short because without a government, every human could do as they please without any consequence.
ReplyDeleteMWF 910-1000 100.02
I would definitely agree with hobbes. "man" would only be able to focus on survial. Sure there would be areas that would have more of a cooperative society but it would be rare. One of the core elements of government is security and when thats taken away or doesnt exist society is reduced to a state of "survial of the fittest". Carlos Canino
ReplyDeletePCSI 100.02
I feel that without government, it would be as Hobbes said: "all against all". There would be terror and destruction and fear everywhere. Without government enforcing laws and rules, anybody could get away with anything. But I feel that after some period of time, that someone may realize that there is strength in numbers and try to convince other people to maybe form an alliance. They could see that it would benefit everyone to do that. So maybe some "mutual-aid" may come in play after awhile.
ReplyDeleteColin Barry
DeletePSCI 100.03
I think life without a government would be a combination of both Hobbes and Kropotkins' views. Humans naturally want to be on top. Therefore, if rules and order were not established, it is possible that life would be hectic and at times brutal. However, once people realize if they want to survive and have an easier life, they will work together. The government does a lot of good for people, but it also controls too much. People aren't helpless. The government needs to have some faith in their people and let them have a little more responsibility. If I choose to not get a job and sit on my couch all day, I should have to suffer the consequences;not get free money. At the same time, people who work hard for their money should not have to give any extra to those who do not. In conclusion, I believe that there should be a government and that it should definitely help people. I do not believe however, that they should spoon feed people who just want to be lazy. It is clear when people legitimately need help, and when they do not. We need to stop "punishing" people for being hard working and start teaching responsibility to those who are not.
ReplyDeleteKelli Crider 100.02
Once, while analyzing the short story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" By Ursula K. LeGuin for a Short Story class, my classmates and I were asked to imagine our own utopia and what made it a utopian society. My answer was a frank response to my inability to imagine Utopia because I see it as a complete fallacy. Why I see it as a fallacy is because humans are animals and like animals, we compete with other animals to obtain resources to ensure our own survival. The only way America could be like Hobbe's vision of anarchy is if resources like food, water, and other necessities have suddenly become finite. However, Belgium just ran with their lives and seem to be undergoing an economic boom and probably well supplied as a result, despite its lack of government, and thus fufilling Kroputkin's vision of anarchy. Somolia, on the otherhand, represents Hobbes' vision because their economy is poor and obtaining resources and medicine is scarce, thus creating a need to compete with other people. One article warns that Belgium's peace probably won't last as their economic boom is good short term, however, problems will arise in the long run due to inflation and could lead to recession or even collapse. If America were to suddenly find itself in an anarchic state, I think we'd most likely fufill Kroputkin's vision because we are well supplied and there have been times in the past where we've banded together against a crisis. But if there comes a time when we're running low on food, clean water, medicine, and no one knows how to obtain more, then we've devolve and come to represent Hobbe's vision.
ReplyDeleteBrian Ardel
PSCI 100.03
I agree with Hobbes vision of anarchy.If all of the sudden there was no government, everything for America would go downhill. Everything would break into sudden, utter chaos.If there are no laws then people can do anything they want. Murder and rape would be happening constantly. Violence would be inevitable; a giant free for all. Disease would quickly spread. Everyone would get very sick from not having food that is safe to eat nor clean water. The FDA makes sure the food distributed is free of anything that could make us sick. I don't think the population would be able to come together and make things work in those conditions. How could we successfully take care of the things that the government does for us daily? Clean water, trash service, sewage, mail service,medicare, etc.We would be suddenly flung into confusion and an every man for himself type of situation. I don't think any country could successfully survive without government.
ReplyDeleteEmily Rogers
TR 12:25-1:40 100.03
If there were to be no government I believe Hobbes has the best prediction on what the world would come to. It would be all against all in an all out struggle. There's already so much trouble getting citizens to abide by the law now, and it's chaotic already. Imagine having no re enforcements,it would be nothing but crime and destruction causing fear everywhere. People are selfish so it would be a complete fall of the nation and literally be survival of the fitest. I think people would provide mutual aid to some extent, such as family and friends, however for the most part America would be even more greedy and dangerous.
ReplyDeleteAngela Raco
TR 12:25-1:40 100.03
I think that the most likely vision of anarchy to occur is both of them collaborating together to create one. I agree with Hobbes for the beginning generations, everyone for themselves struggling to survive. Although, the fear of death and the desire for more civil living conditions, would establish a common goal between individuals in a society and would bring Kropotkin vision into play. People would eventually come together to establish some form of rules and regulations (government) that would secure one's pursuit for a better life.
ReplyDeleteAnthonie Jefferson
MWF 9:10-10:00
Megan Hart mwf 9:10-10:00 sec. 100.02
ReplyDeleteI think that without any sort of government things would crumble. It would be every man for themselves,no one would trust anyone because they would lose their sense of security that comes with having a government. People would just be doing what they want with no regards to anyone else. So their does need to be some sort of government.
Jordan Kaufman MWF 9:10 to 10:00 WH PSCI 100.02
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kropotkin with his statement that society would be far more corporative. I agree with that if we were back in the wild west like you said there was less violence but that was because of how many people there was. There is a lot more people in todays world and it would not work they way Kropotkin viewed it.
Life without government involves a presence of disorganization to the point where everyone has the ability to do what they want. However, in such a state of disorganization things such as food production, economies, and factories that produce important things (clothing, tools, etc) will collapse and everyone will be in struggle (free-for-all). I think of The Road and Hobbes idea of anarchy with this description of life without governing, although the situation in The Road is more than simply a government collapse because it is evident that a global catastrophe took place, making life far more difficult to live.
ReplyDeleteSamuel Bennett
PSCI 100.02
In my opinion I believe with Hobbes theory. I think that America would be an all out war with chaos everyday. I don't think that people in today's society could function without government, everything revolves around it in some way or another. Life without a government structure really would result in every man for themselves.
ReplyDeleteAmber McFadden
PSCI 100.02
I believe in aspects of both Aristotle and Thomas Hobbes' theories but I don't think anarchy would sustain. The world would be in an all out struggle as said in the Hobbes theory, and this is defined by Aristotle's theory that men by nature are political animals. Despite the lack of organized government there would still be a power struggle for someone trying to put themselves in charge. With everyone trying to be in power, new senses of right and wrong would be established with every new faction thinking they know best. Eventually, this would lead to a mass genocide of the entire human race and anarchy would be short lived.
ReplyDeleteMatt Bayles
PSCI 100.02
I agree with what Matt is saying. At some point in the power struggle, someone or a group of people will take control. In order for them to take control, they would have to form some kind of organization. With that organization, some form of rules and regulations would be needed and enforced in order to keep the power. Those groups would have to have some form of protection and security in order to sustain that power.
DeletePaul Hvozdovic
PSCI 100.02
In my opinion life without some type of government would suck in America. The people in our nation have becomed way to violent and greedy. For this reason I think life would suck because of the fact that we are so greedy, and it'd probably make everyone scared so they would get violent. Also, the greed would make people who are this way think they could bully others who are more kind hearted. Americas people in my opinion would ruin this nation with out laws and some type of leadership.
ReplyDeleteDavid Gladden PSCL 100.03 T-TH 12:25-1:40
I believe that life without government will be in between both Kropotkin and Hobbes vision of anarchy. For the most part, Americans are use to stability when it comes to our government, not matter how much we put the government down...Our government tends to provide us a good amount of necessites and protection that other country's government do not. If the government was to fail, it would be be similar to Kropotkin's vision of anarchy, at least at first. Since American's have been use to having a government for years, decades, or however long there has been a government, we would for the most part continue to keep order, because that is the norm. Of course, it could eventually turn into Hobbes vision of anarchy and things can be caotic because people will began to panic and will resort to desperate and violent measures to survive.
ReplyDeleteCher'ie L. Dixon
PSCI 100.02
MWF, 9:10-10:00
I am in the middle with the visions of anarchy. Kropotkin and Hobbes both have an accurate idea of how society should be. Kropotkin's idea stated that a community could cooperate with mutual aid. The people decide whether or not to volunteer to live in the community and obey this one rule. There will be communities that mutually aid one another, but there is no organization because not everyone in the community would cooperate in the same way. Each individual has different views on what is right from wrong. No government would be more peaceful and free, but it's not that simple. Although it would be nice, if there were no 'evil' people in life. I do not believe in a life with no government. Life with no government would be disorganized. Laws are necessary. I agree with Hobbes when it comes to life without government. It would be "poor, brutish, and short." Government is the way to go. I cannot decide which way of life is necessarily better to live in. It all depends on the individual and how they would like to live. I wouldn't want to live in fear my entire life. Relying and trusting others to cooperate is a little risky. I would prefer government only because I have had it in my life this entire time.
ReplyDeleteLauren Williams
PSCI 100:03
TTR 12:25-1:40
While I would like to hope that the Kropotkin vision of anarchy would be more likely to occur, I think that the Hobbes vision of anarchy rings most true.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was living in Charleston this summer, there was a terrible storm that knocked out power all over the state. The first night of what would be two weeks without power, was nothing short of stark raving mad. People were scrambling for food and gasoline at the places that were still available. I witnessed people becoming hostile and fighting. Thank god the police were there or someone would have really been hurt.
I witnessed the greed and desperation of people. I can't imagine what life would be like without government. We need protection and structure to function as a society. We cannot thrive in chaos because people, while capable of great acts of kindness and compassion, are ultimately greedy, self-serving creatures.
This is not to say that the Kropotkin vision isn't true, but I think the Hobbes vision of anarchy is far more likely to occur.
Veronica J. Victor TR 12:25-1:40 100.3
I believe life in the US would be an all out struggle in heavy populated areas such as cities, where food would become scarce in a very short period of time. In rural areas I believe that it will not be as bad because people are more self-sufficient and are used to living off of the land and doing things for themselves. Life without government would be more of an inconvience because government deals with a lot of our basic needs, ie: security, roads, water and sewer.
ReplyDeleteMelissa Taylor TR 12:25-1:40 100.03
I believe that life without a government would be hectic!. some things would be better and some things would get worse. We as humans need a government inorder to survive. We are greedy people and not many of us have a nice personality. Government has a lot to do with out lives and we dont value it as much as we should. water,roads,security,waste systems all are provided by the govt. These services can not be provided by ourselves it tkes a lot of money and time to do. So having a governent is very important. Things are under control. - Fatima owais TR 12:25-1:40 100.3
ReplyDelete