Oh, of course I don't literally mean it's rebelling for the sake of rebelling. No one deliberately thinks that they are going to rebel simply to rebel; they always believe it's in pursuit of some kind of truth. But Anarchy is an idea that only a young, impulsive, and independence-hungry mind could find in any way viable or preferable to any other form of government; it's based on a lot of assumptions about human nature that don't hold up to any serious scrutiny.Jamous said:I've read that Hobbes. I don't like it but I agree. "Nasty Brutish And Short" etc. However, your definition of Anarchy is still wrong. Anarchy is not "just rebelling for the sake of rebelling." As I said, go back over the thread and you'll find better definitions. I'm afraid "those people" describing Anarchy aren't wrong, even if Anarchy can't and won't work any more.mechanixis said:And read over some Thomas Hobbes and you'll find why they're all wrong. At the end of the day, in an anarchist society, the strong have nothing to lose from preying on the weak. Morality is something that comes with civilization and the social contract.Jamous said:No. No it is not. Read back over the thread and you'll find most people telling you, correctly, otherwise.mechanixis said:Pretty much precisely. Anarchy is just rebelling for the sake of rebelling.TheHecatomb said:I think it's something only ignorant little punk kids would feel is a good thing, because they feel like rebelling against "the world" and haven't thought it through. Which is why they typically grow out of it as soon as their hormones start settling down.