Everyone says they don't like government right? Taxes, people in power they don't like, to many secrets kept from us, there are many reasons.
But what if there was no government? I'm talking about a State of Nature, where there is no government. The people make their own rules and ideas.
Considering human nature, this would be anarchy. Question is, which do you choose? Government, or State of Nature? And please, for the sake of argument, post why.
I was replying to TheDude. He seems to think that if a random country suddenly became Anarcist, everyone would be Christian. For some reason I seemed to have thought he mentioned God in there somewhere (no idea why, must be tired).
I never said that... I said that Somalia had anarchy but was the worst country. Then I said that good Christians never kill.
Which is exactly why the 'an eye for an eye' argument doesn't work. People who aren't able to kill will always be subject to those who can.
Everyone is capable of mass murder if given the right (or wrong, in this case) circumstances. Everyone, any day. No one is immune from corruption, mental illness, or national service. People in the military go in one day, perfectly normal, and leave prepared to pick up a rifle and kill and/or be killed. People who were the sweetest people get diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and may one day being another Ted Bundy. Those who are incapable of surviving without proper needs and necessities can be bribed quite easily to do anything, just to feed their families.
Do you see where I'm going with this?
This problem is easily solved by the agressor, by him bringing only 2 or so friends.
In the modern era, two or so friends are more than likely not going to protect you from an AK-47. Even if they are, every person they kill is opening up a whole new can of worms.
