Someone had posted this on another board and it really had me thinking: if you had to choose a way of living for a country, would it be more free-formed and spontaneous (Chaos) or more structerd and stabled (Order)? Before you choose, you have to think about the extremes of both (Anarchy vs. Communism) and how they've affected the world.

I'd choose Order. It was a hard choice for me but I'd rather want a world where I can expect what's to come than a world of uncertainty and spectulation. I just feel more comfortable about rules and guidlines. Now, I wouldn't want an authoritarian world since I'd feel more like a robot than a human being.

Wait...Communism doesn't = Order.


Communism is an Economic system based on the ideas of Karl Marx

Communism is an ideology that seeks to establish a classless, stateless social organization based on common ownership of the means of production. It is usually considered a branch of the broader socialist movement that draws on the various political and intellectual movements that trace their origins back to the work of Karl Marx.

Excuse me, but I would like to add to the above post:

'Anarchy' doesn't mean 'chaos' or 'without order'.

The word Anarchy means 'without leaders'. And having no leaders does not exclude having order.

Anarchy in the purest meaning is actually true democracy.

Gah! Sorry about the Anarchy and Communism idea, I just thought that that was the extremes of each. I need to read up on Wiki more!

Shall I update the question perhaps?

Would you rather live in a communist society, or a society without leaders (Anarchy)?

Will that get you to answer?

;o

That's more of a intellectual view of Marxism, certainly. Implementation of Marxism, contrary to popular belief, actually varies enormous--remember, Marxism harkens back to much older Socialist traditions, so Marxism isn't just found in famous communist superpowers--most nations in Western Europe exercise "socialism", especially from an American point of view, as part of their democracies.

You could say the same thing about capitalism--there is no such thing as a "perfect capitalist" state, especially in the Adam Smith sense (when the rise of the global market, corporate politics and business education, Smith is as obsolete, if not more, than Marx). "Perfect competition" does not exist anywhere. What you have is a capitalist-evolution of the industrial state that rose centuries earlier (communist states rose out of the same thing).

Personally, I feel chaos is even less of an answer. Humans are social beings by nature, as as much as we worship the individual in America, that doesn't change the fact that we require some minimal degree of solidarity with our fellow humans (even outside of our families) to function. This sort of cooperation requires order--and we distribute authority based on that.

Anarchy--it's hard to imagine a "anarchic" society without images of civil war. But that's just me. Give me order over chaos--even if that means totalitarianism over complete anarchy and civil war. Humans need air, water, food, and company. You're more likely to get all four of those with order than chaos.