Pragmatic points for anarchy

last edited 2024-11-05

It's easy enough to point out how governments are criminal organizations with no basis for their authority:

and usually a statist's reply isn't to contend with those arguments (they're too obviously correct) but to argue that government is somehow necessary. I already shot down that idea in the same article. In this article I just want to point out some additional pragmatic downsides of government, and in particular of democracy.

It encourages discrimination

What should you expect to happen if you take a society with an imbalance of superficial traits, such as race or sexuality, and build a system where every conflict is decided by who has more votes? Should you be surprised when the minority ends up with less rights?

Contrast how free markets actively *dis*courage discrimination by depriving bigots of customers and employees.

It divides people who have no reason to fight into arbitrary groups, creating needless conflict

This one is really sad. You might be a soldier in country A and have no problem with the people of country B, but if "your country" decides to make war on theirs, you have to kill them. I have an idea for a short novel I want to make about two soldiers in opposing countries that go to war with each other. They talk, and realize they should be on the same side, and end up both murdered by their own governments for refusing to kill their friend.