@@BabyGirlDontEvenPlayif he doesn't sacrifice if his life, pointlessly, for the state of san Fransisco he, must obviously want it to be that way? Where in the world is OP? Because it'd funny if he's from Europe or something just to further compound the absurdity.
I completely agree. Anarchism is the default which is why there is so much outcry over Authoritarianism. The evolution of slangs, cants and creoles in language demonstrate anarchy in action.
Anarchism is not the default. When people were originally hunter/gatherers, they did so in groups that banded together and eventually became tribes living in small villages. Eventually that led to further consolidation of larger groups into city states and overtime there was a further form of consolidation either through wars or royal marriages of the now royalty of these city states to form kingdoms and empires. The natural instinct is to live under some sort of structure and higher order, not under no rule of law or authority at all. That can theoretically work for one individual or small group of individuals living alone in the woods.
They banded together to help each other, that is our innate nature to help people. That is anrachism, it is not some some natural instict to live under a structure of higher order
@@Zxolnos nope. Because after they formed small hunter/gatherer tribes or small farming villages initially, then the push for centuries after that was consolidation of land and resources, first under the auspices of regional warlords, then kings, queens and emperors/empresses up until we got to the modern nation state system of the last couple hundred years. So the innate need for authority, structure and order is quite clear.
@@bozeeke That's how things developed but that doesn't mean that's our innate nature. We cooperate, we help each other, that is what brought people together in the first place. We don't know how authority came to be but it's not natural and it's not our nature.
@@Zxolnos Incorrect. There's a lust/quest for power need among alpha personality type individuals (which led to the rise powerful warlords-which then led to monarchs) and there are others who have a natural proclivity to follow those people (hence why they had large armies). And there are still others who were content to live under the thumb of these powerful rulers even if they are flawed for fear of a worse invader who may come in and kill or enslave everybody living in the area. This consolidation of land, resources and power is based on natural human instinct and behavior. If anarchy were the default, we'd be living individually in small groups out in the woods.
@@bozeeke "alpha personality type" Had nothing to do with them rising to power and becoming warlords, if someone was a skilled hunter/fighter that led them more often than not to be a warlord, because they were better at fighting. And no, no one has a natural desire to just follow. I think you've been in red pill corner for too long if thats your belief. Anarchy is the default, if it wasn't why are governments trying to keep anarchist in check? because they know once we realize that its the default and we experience it, we'd be better off without rulers or nations. And yeah some would be living in the woods but not everyone, but even people that lived in the woods learned how to build shelters
That would depend on the kind of a criminal. Right now, anyone who offends the state and its many, many, many laws is a criminal, so that broad definition would not apply.
Google question: difference feudalism communism? A: Technically, the government owns everything, which is communism, but actually a few wealthy families own everything which is feudalism.
For such an enthusiastic anarchist 'seller' Michael ironically does a terrible job of explaining and elaborating WHAT anarchism actually IS as a simple principle and/or politically to the general public (almost like someone who incorrectly assumes that everyone else has gone through the same thought process that he has).....especially when the simple/basic general public understanding/perception of it is a spray painted 'A' and a mohawk/piercings cliche.
Agree. We are apes and apes have an alpha leader. Humanity's problem may be that we can't culturally move past our primitive hunter gather brains. In other words, our cultural evolution may have progressed way past our physical evolution and now culture can't progress anymore. In fact, it keeps defaulting to authoritarian because that is just the way our hunter gatherer brains are wired.
Do you agree with Michael Malice?
For more liberty clips, subscribe to my channel and click the bell!
Chaos is no rules
Anarchy is no rulers
Anarchy leads to chaos because there are no rulers.
@@penitentone6998 The tribes of north america didn't have rulers.
@@penitentone6998there are nongovernmental leaders in anarchism, they just don’t put a gun to your head and say lies like taxes aren’t stolen.
Haha... that strange urge to save everyone from themselves. Happily, i don't share that urge any more than Malice seems too.
You would rather everyone around you end up like San Francisco?
@@BabyGirlDontEvenPlayif he doesn't sacrifice if his life, pointlessly, for the state of san Fransisco he, must obviously want it to be that way? Where in the world is OP? Because it'd funny if he's from Europe or something just to further compound the absurdity.
I completely agree. Anarchism is the default which is why there is so much outcry over Authoritarianism.
The evolution of slangs, cants and creoles in language demonstrate anarchy in action.
Wait…what are morals?…who had the authority to say what’s moral?…what gives the authority to tell me what morals I should follow?…
Anarchism is not the default. When people were originally hunter/gatherers, they did so in groups that banded together and eventually became tribes living in small villages. Eventually that led to further consolidation of larger groups into city states and overtime there was a further form of consolidation either through wars or royal marriages of the now royalty of these city states to form kingdoms and empires. The natural instinct is to live under some sort of structure and higher order, not under no rule of law or authority at all. That can theoretically work for one individual or small group of individuals living alone in the woods.
They banded together to help each other, that is our innate nature to help people. That is anrachism, it is not some some natural instict to live under a structure of higher order
@@Zxolnos nope. Because after they formed small hunter/gatherer tribes or small farming villages initially, then the push for centuries after that was consolidation of land and resources, first under the auspices of regional warlords, then kings, queens and emperors/empresses up until we got to the modern nation state system of the last couple hundred years. So the innate need for authority, structure and order is quite clear.
@@bozeeke That's how things developed but that doesn't mean that's our innate nature. We cooperate, we help each other, that is what brought people together in the first place. We don't know how authority came to be but it's not natural and it's not our nature.
@@Zxolnos Incorrect. There's a lust/quest for power need among alpha personality type individuals (which led to the rise powerful warlords-which then led to monarchs) and there are others who have a natural proclivity to follow those people (hence why they had large armies). And there are still others who were content to live under the thumb of these powerful rulers even if they are flawed for fear of a worse invader who may come in and kill or enslave everybody living in the area. This consolidation of land, resources and power is based on natural human instinct and behavior. If anarchy were the default, we'd be living individually in small groups out in the woods.
@@bozeeke "alpha personality type" Had nothing to do with them rising to power and becoming warlords, if someone was a skilled hunter/fighter that led them more often than not to be a warlord, because they were better at fighting. And no, no one has a natural desire to just follow. I think you've been in red pill corner for too long if thats your belief. Anarchy is the default, if it wasn't why are governments trying to keep anarchist in check? because they know once we realize that its the default and we experience it, we'd be better off without rulers or nations. And yeah some would be living in the woods but not everyone, but even people that lived in the woods learned how to build shelters
Devil is in the details
What do we do with criminals?
Who catches them?
That would depend on the kind of a criminal.
Right now, anyone who offends the state and its many, many, many laws is a criminal, so that broad definition would not apply.
If you're trying to extol the greatness of anarchy, maybe saying that English is a good example isn't the best as it is terrible....
Google question: difference feudalism communism?
A: Technically, the government owns everything, which is communism, but actually a few wealthy families own everything which is feudalism.
For such an enthusiastic anarchist 'seller' Michael ironically does a terrible job of explaining and elaborating WHAT anarchism actually IS as a simple principle and/or politically to the general public (almost like someone who incorrectly assumes that everyone else has gone through the same thought process that he has).....especially when the simple/basic general public understanding/perception of it is a spray painted 'A' and a mohawk/piercings cliche.
Monarchy is the natural state of man, not anarchy
Either shepherd yourselves, by rams of your own. Or be herded by something else, for wants of their own.
Agree. We are apes and apes have an alpha leader. Humanity's problem may be that we can't culturally move past our primitive hunter gather brains. In other words, our cultural evolution may have progressed way past our physical evolution and now culture can't progress anymore. In fact, it keeps defaulting to authoritarian because that is just the way our hunter gatherer brains are wired.