Political Conspiracy, Anyone?

>>18273226
That actually makes some sense.

Tribalism is mankind's natural state.

>>18273226
It is painfully obvious to the point where it triggers people on such an emotional level that they refuse to admit the possibility because they just don't know what to do. I for one would love to see people dropping shitty politicians with .308s.

Anarchy can never last. I believe forms of governments go through a natural process of evolution. The process of shifting from one government to the next is compounded by changes in political theory as goverments repspond practically to the problems each preceding form of government creates.

Though anarchy is the lack of recognised leadership, it can never, last as tribalism will always result from the societies humans naturally form. Tribalism, with a de facto leader, will eventually evolve into a formal government with laws and policies.
To answer your question: Yes, I do think that anarchy and similar, more devolved/decentralised forms of government are suppressed, but only because they are regressive.

Democracy was a mistake.

Hobbes was right.

>>18273309
By the way, just thought it might be worth a mention that the last time a significant part of the world had a power vacuum resulting from the removal of a formally developed government it caused the Dark Ages.

Its partially to insure power, but on a more practical level its about how a large society like the ones on this planet can function without one, It can't be just anarchy not truly, there needs to be a consensus among people on what should or shouldn't be done, generally how those decisions are to be made and done/by whom, and how resources which are finite in nature get to each person,

we are at the crossroads between two theoretical lines of governance. I'm a firm believer that there either needs to be a peaceful evolution from them, a synthesis into something new, something more conscious of human needs and ethics both individually and socially.

>>18273226
>Just look how people on both sides of the aisle foam at the mouth when the idea of giving power to the individual

They do this because they know, and have seen that giving power to individuals (especially designates) causes it to be abused and misused. The unfortunate fact of reality is that many, MANY people are very deeply sick and it's for the best of everyone if a select few lead the rest.

>>18273491
degenerates* not designates

>>18273349
Even if power reproduce itself, and we need a goverment.

Does it has to be always the same people?

The same families, the same parties, the same money?

Can we at least try someone different.

>>18273226
anarchy just leads to a power vacuum for a dictator

>>18273491
>Only the best will lead
Statist actually believe this, ha. See Bush, Obama, The Clintons, etc. LMAO, god, you guys are funny.

>>18273526
>anarchy just leads to a power vacuum for a dictator
You mean like the power vacuums and dictators we've had with Socialism and other forms of Statism?

>>18273547
They pandered to the anger and negative feelings of the lower classes and to the higher classes, which helped them gain the money and influence to earn the trust of the lower class to vote for them. You're correct that these are not the best leaders, but they were only elected because of the ignorance of the people.

File: lolbertarian.gif (2MB, 480x268px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x268px

>>18273226
Dude weed bro?