Still Having a Bad Day? Exchange Your Rants For Hugs Here!

[Kaymyth she/her]

True, very true. It might be why the listing asked candidates to email their resumes, but they had to know someone would call eventually.

I'm not so scared anymore. I'm just mad. Not ONCE did ANYONE say a word to me about my performance. Not ONCE was I told I had improvements to make. And now they're just going behind my back to find a replacement? The hell?

 

Given the slight time difference, is it just possible that they might be busy enough as to need a second person at the desk?  Trying to Think Well of Others here...

 

Though even then, they should've said something to you, like, "Oh, we're going to be getting some backup for you."  Or something.

 

EDIT:  OK, so many ninja posts.  I dunno.  I'd be tempted to call him out and say, "So were you going to tell me that you're trying to hire someone new for my job?" and watch him turn seven different shades of purple.  But then, I have no qualms about making another person feel awkward if I feel they deserve it.

 

Sometimes I wonder why I am the evil one. That is genius!

 

Disclaimer:  I am in no way advocating or condoning such behavior.  I am merely pointing out a possibility that the bosses should have considered when they started playing shenanigans.  Your mileage may vary, void where prohibited, this product was packaged in a facility that handles nuts.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Kaymyth

[Kobold King he/him]

Thing is, you have to wonder if what you're describing is anarchy? Anarchy is defined as the state of disorder due to the absence or nonrecognition of authority. But what you've described does feature authority, in the form of social contracts. In what you've described, non-stated social contracts would govern in the place of actual laws. I assume that in your described society, you expect people to not murder or steal. How do you deal with someone who does, though? If you were truly anarchical, then you cannot take action against the perpetrator, because they've done nothing wrong, by definition of the anarchy system.

 

In the end, what you and Kobold are wanting is a society where every member is good and pure. Should such a society arise, I'd argue that whether they be anarchist or communist, it wouldn't matter, as everyone is good and pure, and the flaws you've described with our current system wouldn't exist.

 

 

Many characterize the anarchist's goal as an idealist's pipe dream. "Naive optimists, the lot of them," the pro-government arguer exclaims. "All humans have the capacity for evil, which is why they must be kept in check by an organized authority."

 

To me, this reasoning disintegrates upon contact with pure logic. If all humans have the capacity for evil, how does anyone expect giving a crowd of humans total power over their peers to end in any way but badly?

 

Consider this. An evil man ten thousand years ago had only two options to carry out his base wickedness. He could travel into the wilderness, becoming a fierce brigand, or he could attempt to take over his tribe and institute a tyranny. In either case, if the people of that tribe took a firm stance against him, his efforts would fail. A brigand, even a gang of brigands, will never be as powerful as an entire society that opposes them.

 

But if the people accept a leader of any kind, a government is formed. The government might be founded by a tyrant, making it rotten from the very start; alternately, it might begin with a kindly chief or shaman who genuinely cares for the people, beginning a brief golden age but inevitably deteriorating into a corrupt and subjugated society.

 

That last part is not open for debate--every government degrades into evil. No American could look me in the eye and say that they believe not one single president has done palpable damage to this country; they might disagree on which presidents were the problems, but they all agree that we've had terrible rulers. On a smaller level things are much worse. Police brutality runs rampant in the country today. Taxes skyrocket, fueling programs that the taxpayers might not support in the slightest. That's not even getting into the Japanese internment camps of the last century, or government laws in favor of slavery before the Civil War, or the absolutely horrid regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Nero, and countless other rulers through history.

 

All government either begins evil, or becomes evil in a distressingly swift amount of time. And the scale of an institutionalized evil like the Holocaust will always leave the petty tyrannies of an anarchist brigand in the dust.

 

You say that anarchy only works with perfect human beings. Quite the contrary, I say that it is government that sprung from the minds of naive optimists, not anarchy. It is government that relies on its upholders to be always pure and devoid of evil intent, not anarchy. It is government that brings an age of darkness and wickedness with even one foul ruler at its head, not anarchy.

 

It is government that cannot exist in our imperfect world, not anarchy.

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles she/her]

Given the slight time difference, is it just possible that they might be busy enough as to need a second person at the desk? Trying to Think Well of Others here...

Though even then, they should've said something to you, like, "Oh, we're going to be getting some backup for you." Or something.

Possible, but I don't know if it's likely. Sometimes I'm completely swamped, and other times I have nothing going on. The most incriminating piece of evidence toward the "they're replacing me" theory is that the hours listed Saturday. Saturdays are never busy for me. Hiring backup for me on a Saturday would just be silly. Edited October 12, 2015 by TwiLyghtSansSparkles

[Voidus]

Here's the thing about police badges--good men don't need them to do good deeds, but evil men rely heavily on them to get away with acts of wickedness. So the way I see it, why have a police force at all?

 

In ye olden days, entire towns would come together to search for missing children, or to drive murderers, rapists, thieves, and other vile sorts out of their community. In such a colonial system, the good men that made up the Douglas police department would have been anxiously searching for your sister whether or not they had badges or official authority. They'd do it because it's the right thing to do. Good men will be good, regardless of what they get in return.

 

The men who killed Otto Zehm were evil men. They exist in all societies, often becoming murderers, rapists, thieves, and other vile sorts. Unfortunately, our society is one of the few cultures that looks at such men, calls them "determined and hard-working," and grants them legal immunity and authority over law-abiding citizens. Evil men will be evil, but they won't get nearly so far in a society that drives them out into the wilderness as they will in a society that gives them a gun and permits them to go hog-wild.

 

Here's the sad truth about human government: it's based wholesale on a logical fallacy. Specifically, it's based on an "Appeal to Fear" fallacy; if you don't permit these armed men to take some of your money, society says, even more armed men will be breaking down your doors to take all of your money, or to burn down your house, or to enslave you, or to rape your family members, or do any number of other terrible things. There is no proof of this claim, but the people of western society has fallen for this protection racket hook, line, and sinker.

 

Heroes will be heroes and villains will be villains, but society has proven it can't tell which is which. Government does nothing to help the heroes but offers tailor-made positions of power to the vilest villains the population has to offer, which is why I now and forever label myself an anarchist.

 

 

 

I was born with a physical disability (a clubfoot) and I often subconsciously walk with my hands clasped behind my back.

 

Good luck catching up with me.

I have a brain disorder, antisocial tendencies and I've been practicing my evil laugh since the age of 5.

*smugly folds arms*

Also, I own a cat which frequently sits in my lap when I'm on a swivel chair. 

[Mistrunner]

Possible, but I don't know if it's likely. Sometimes I'm completely swamped, and other times I have nothing going on. The most incriminating piece of evidence toward the "they're replacing me" theory is that the hours listed Saturday. Saturdays are never busy for me. Hiring backup for me on a Saturday would just be silly.

[hugs again]

[Delightful]

Bruce saw his own reflection in the mirror this morning and barked for like a minute straight.

And Mollie is teaching him how to bring people shoes when they come home.

Oh, and he's scared of the dark, so last night, he walked into an empty room with the light turned off and barked until someone turned the light on.

What happened?

These stories are adorable and thank you all .

What happened? It's more of a "what's happening". The answer to which is, multiple terror attacks, random stabbings, every day for the past week and a bit. So now when i hear multiple sirens going off simultaneously I know *something* bad has happened (I can't like pretend the siren might be a woman giving birth or something). And I'm walking music-less down the street trying to figure out if that guy looks threatening or whether that woman is holding a phone or a knife, and can I cross the road in enough time that I can run if the driver decides to run me over, and am i sure I want to go outside in these shoes and not ones I can better run in. A

And I know that it's only so scary because it's terror specifically and it's reported on, and that normal crime probably is worse objectively. So I'm trying to not be scared, and have faith that everything will be fine and that G-D has a plan that I can't understand from my limited perspective.....but the stress does build and sometimes I need a cute story to remind me that there are adorable and kind people and animals in this world. And you guys are great at that .

Twi......is there anyway you can confront a supervisor and ask what's going on?

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles she/her]

These stories are adorable and thank you all .

What happened? It's more of a "what's happening". The answer to which is, multiple terror attacks, random stabbings, every day for the past week and a bit. So now when i hear multiple sirens going off simultaneously I know *something* bad has happened (I can't like pretend the siren might be a woman giving birth or something). And I'm walking music-less down the street trying to figure out if that guy looks threatening or whether that woman is holding a phone or a knife, and can I cross the road in enough time that I can run if the driver decides to run me over, and am i sure I want to go outside in these shoes and not ones I can better run in. A

And I know that it's only so scary because it's terror specifically and it's reported on, and that normal crime probably is worse objectively. So I'm trying to not be scared, and have faith that everything will be fine and that G-D has a plan that I can't understand from my limited perspective.....but the stress does build and sometimes I need a cute story to remind me that there are adorable and kind people and animals in this world. And you guys are great at that .

Twi......is there anyway you can confront a supervisor and ask what's going on?

That's awful. I'm praying things get better over there soon. And in the meantime, I'd be happy to supply any cute pug stories you need.

I can, and I probably should just so I know....but I'm scared to. There's a chance I'd learn that my boss is actually planning to move me to the morning shift because the other receptionist said she's leaving, but my brain keeps saying he'd use it as a chance to berate me for all the mistakes I was never told about and fire me on the spot.

[Delightful]

That's awful. I'm praying things get better over there soon. And in the meantime, I'd be happy to supply any cute pug stories you need.

I can, and I probably should just so I know....but I'm scared to. There's a chance I'd learn that my boss is actually planning to move me to the morning shift because the other receptionist said she's leaving, but my brain keeps saying he'd use it as a chance to berate me for all the mistakes I was never told about and fire me on the spot.

Thank you

Worst case scenario, *can* he just fire you on the spot? I'm pretty sure in Australia at least a boss has to give warning and have a decent reason for firing otherwise they can be sued.

[Kaymyth she/her]

I can, and I probably should just so I know....but I'm scared to. There's a chance I'd learn that my boss is actually planning to move me to the morning shift because the other receptionist said she's leaving,

 

I like this theory.  I think I'll go with it.

 

Thank you

Worst case scenario, *can* he just fire you on the spot? I'm pretty sure in Australia at least a boss has to give warning and have a decent reason for firing otherwise they can be sued.

 

In the U.S., for the most part, yes.  Unless you're either 1) a union worker, 2) someone who works in an industry with tenure, or 3) you are being provably fired for a legally prohibited reason.  But yeah, companies can absolutely fire someone and not give a reason, or give a completely made-up load of nonsense like, "we just don't think you're a good fit."

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles she/her]

I like this theory. I think I'll go with it.

In the U.S., for the most part, yes. Unless you're either 1) a union worker, 2) someone who works in an industry with tenure, or 3) you are being provably fired for a legally prohibited reason. But yeah, companies can absolutely fire someone and not give a reason, or give a completely made-up load of nonsense like, "we just don't think you're a good fit."

I'll go with it for now, but I'll also double my applications for other jobs in case he is planning to fire me.

And that's what scares me.

[Blaze1616 he/him]

...

 

Okay Kobold. First, take a deep breath. Everything is going to be okay. 

 

Second, ignoring the fact that I am a "pro-government arguer", I never stated anarchy cannot work. Merely that what was being described wasn't anarchy. Though I do believe anarchy to be an irreparably flawed system, I also believe government to be an irreparably flawed system. In the end, we must choose the lesser of two evils. Now, I would argue that there really isn't a decision, as anarchy inevitably leads to the creation of government, but that wasn't the point of this discussion. Should you like to have said discussion, I'd be happy to partake.

 

Third, to offer a response of some kind, governments are usually created with the expectation that the just and logical would rule. That is why our government places the decision of rulership on the people. But we are not a democracy, we are a republic. Why does this distinction matter? Because it allows the just and logical minds that inhabit the electoral college to make the decision that is best for the country, should the people be so vastly misguided. Now, saying that, I feel comfortable with my assumption that you disagree with our founding fathers, and I must say I disagree as well, since the members of the electoral college aren't guaranteed to be just or logical. We both have differing solutions, and I'm again confident in my assumption that my solution goes in the opposite direction as yours. But that's the beauty of our society; we're allowed to have different opinions.

 

---

 

Smile Kobold. The world isn't going to end today 

Edited October 12, 2015 by Blaze1616

[Kaymyth she/her]

I'll go with it for now, but I'll also double my applications for other jobs in case he is planning to fire me.

And that's what scares me.

 

It makes sense to me.  Though if you really wanted to be sneaky, you could figure out where the job is posted and take a look and see if there's also a job posted for the morning shift.  If there isn't, and they are planning on replacing you, then your employers are unfathomably stupid.  If there is, they're still stupid and jerks to boot.  But if there isn't and they're just going to move you, then they're dumb with a side of thoughtless.  I mean, they didn't even ask you if you want to work the morning shift.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Kaymyth

[Mistrunner]

I WILL HUG YOU ALL

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles she/her]

It makes sense to me. Though if you really wanted to be sneaky, you could figure out where the job is posted and take a look and see if there's also a job posted for the morning shift. If there isn't, and they are planning on replacing you, then your employers are unfathomably stupid. If there is, they're still stupid and jerks to boot. But if there isn't and they're just going to move you, then they're dumb with a side of thoughtless. I mean, they didn't even ask you if you want to work the morning shift.

There isn't. I did the math, though, and it would screw up the morning person's hours. Either they'd get overtime every week, or they'd lose an hour every week. So I have no idea what that means.

[Delightful]

I WILL HUG YOU ALL

Gotta hug em all, gotta hug em all, 17th! (Shard)

[Kobold King he/him]

Okay Kobold. First, take a deep breath. Everything is going to be okay. 

 

Second, ignoring the fact that I am a "pro-government arguer", I never stated anarchy cannot work. Merely that what was being described wasn't anarchy. Though I do believe anarchy to be an irreparably flawed system, I also believe government to be an irreparably flawed system. In the end, we must choose the lesser of two evils. Now, I would argue that there really isn't a decision, as anarchy inevitably leads to the creation of government, but that wasn't the point of this discussion. Should you like to have said discussion, I'd be happy to partake.

 

Third, to offer a response of some kind, governments are usually created with the expectation that the just and logical would rule. That is why our government places the decision of rulership on the people. But we are not a democracy, we are a republic. Why does this distinction matter? Because it allows the just and logical minds that inhabit the electoral college to make the decision that is best for the country, should the people be so vastly misguided. Now, saying that, I feel comfortable with my assumption that you disagree with our founding fathers, and I must say I disagree as well, since the members of the electoral college aren't guaranteed to be just or logical. We both have differing solutions, and I'm again confident in my assumption that my solution goes in the opposite direction as yours. But that's the beauty of our society; we're allowed to have different opinions.

 

---

 

Smile Kobold. The world isn't going to end today 

 

I certainly don't mean to be uncivil. My passions in this argument are directed at the ideas involved, not at you--sorry if it sounds any other way.

 

First of all, I believe you're under a misconception about what the word "anarchy" means. I have read a lot of anarchist texts in my day, and I will say, I have never once seen it equated with the absence of moral law. Anarchy only means the absence of human law, or government, which is a very different concept.

 

As for our society allowing differing opinions... yes and no. I harbor no ill will towards anyone who is not an anarchist. However, in this society, differing opinions is allowed, but acting upon the anarchist opinion is strictly outlawed. If I stop paying taxes--even if I don't harm a single human being--my God-given right to freedom will be seized immediately. I will be swiftly tried and tossed into a prison to rot for the sole "crime" of not giving my money to an institution I despite wholeheartedly. Does that sound like a moral authority, or does that sound like the Mafia?

 

If I sound passionate, it is because I write these words with the barrel of a gun levied into my face. If the government truly existed to help me, it would give me an option to opt out of their system. There would be an office where I could write my name and say "I'm not interested in what you're selling. I am willing to forego your services in exchange for not paying taxes."

 

There is no such office. I would be imprisoned for even trying to opt out of the system that was ratified before my birth. I'm more than happy to hold differing opinions from my friends, dear Blaze, but the government of my country only allows me my opinion so long as I stay under its thumb. There can be no agreeing to disagree with such a faction; I will continue to be passionate in my words until the day comes when I don't labor as the slave of a self-righteous society.

 

 

Again, I can't stress enough that I don't harbor ill will towards you, Blaze. Towards the Founding Fathers, yes, and to the federal government of today doubly. But most certainly not towards you.

[Blaze1616 he/him]

...

 

No ill will perceived, my friend. I was merely worried that things might be getting to you given your recent status update. 

 

As for what anarchy means, I provided the definition. Perhaps it is not the meaning you are intending, but anarchy means as I said, the state of disorder due to the absence or nonrecognition of authority. That does not specify moral authority, nor human authority, but authority, period. Following any form of laws, be they just or unjust, highly structured or simple social contracts, is no longer anarchy.

 

Anyways, I do feel sorry for you, being forced to live in a society you disagree with. It seems that the only option given to you is to leave. Though I am curious, do you realize what all you lose if you don't pay taxes?

 

Since it sounds like you might actually be interested, somewhere in one of the east coast states, I believe, is a study about anarchy, where volunteers are being allowed to live in such a society as I'm understanding you to desire. It was done once before and deemed a failure, but they are trying it again. Quick searches for it provided me no fruit, but I can dig a bit more and get back to you with details if you'd like. I heard about it in a discussion about anarchy that I had a month or so ago, as one of my friends feels very similarly to you.

[Kaymyth she/her]

There isn't. I did the math, though, and it would screw up the morning person's hours. Either they'd get overtime every week, or they'd lose an hour every week. So I have no idea what that means.

 

It means that your employer is an idiot and can't math.

[Voidus]

I'll chime in quickly and say I'm something akin to a communist and that once again 17th Shard is apparently the only place on the entire internet where things like this can be discussed without starting a flame war.

[Kobold King he/him]

No ill will perceived, my friend. I was merely worried that things might be getting to you given your recent status update. 

 

As for what anarchy means, I provided the definition. Perhaps it is not the meaning you are intending, but anarchy means as I said, the state of disorder due to the absence or nonrecognition of authority. That does not specify moral authority, nor human authority, but authority, period. Following any form of laws, be they just or unjust, highly structured or simple social contracts, is no longer anarchy.

 

Anyways, I do feel sorry for you, being forced to live in a society you disagree with. It seems that the only option given to you is to leave. Though I am curious, do you realize what all you lose if you don't pay taxes?

 

Since it sounds like you might actually be interested, somewhere in one of the east coast states, I believe, is a study about anarchy, where volunteers are being allowed to live in such a society as I'm understanding you to desire. It was done once before and deemed a failure, but they are trying it again. Quick searches for it provided me no fruit, but I can dig a bit more and get back to you with details if you'd like. I heard about it in a discussion about anarchy that I had a month or so ago, as one of my friends feels very similarly to you.

 

I'm easily irked at the moment, but I'm always passionate about this subject.

 

Moral guidelines was considered a given by the earliest proponents of anarchy. "Authority" is, by Google's dictionary you seem to be using, 

 

"The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience."

 

I can be 100% opposed to authority--the ability of any other human to give me an order, make a decision for me, or enforce my obedience--while still obeying my own moral code. There is no conflict between supporting anarchy and upholding a moral code.

 

 

Let's see... what would I lose if I severed my connection to the government?

 

• Law enforcement. I believe I've already made the case for the law enforcement of my community being completely, 100% useless. They weren't there for me when I was shot at by ruffians, and they won't be there next time it happens either. I have no use for such an agency.
• Education. I'm homeschooled, as is my family. Next.
• Libraries. A subset of education, I suppose? In any case, the town closest to me closed its library to pay for a half-a-million dollar football field that I don't use. In addition, libraries could also get their funds through private charities or simply by sheer volunteer work. When it comes down to it, as much as I love a good book I don't support anyone's right to extort hard-earned resources from others just to maintain a library.
• Roads. I don't like roads. They pave over the landscape, turning once pristine wilderness into asphalt lines of death. I want to see the roads fall into disrepair and erode away, so we can go back to natural transportation like donkeys. If for whatever reason a community decides that it absolutely must have roads, then volunteers can maintain it for them. I for one won't shed any tears over it.
• National Security. This is a big deal, and it is the reason the Founding Fathers supported government. In the Federalist Papers they maintained that a strong central government was essential for standing firm against foreign invaders. To me, however, this is much like summoning Cthulhu to fend off Godzilla. There's no point in repelling tyrants from overseas if you're going to surrender to tyrants here at home. I refuse to run into the arms of one evil out of fear of another.

(A side note: a people that doesn't want to be conquered will not be conquered. Not forever, at least. The people of Vietnam have resisted invasions from the mightiest empires of the world, the United States included. The only faction that was able to break their spirit and oppress them was their own government, not any foreign power.)

• Vital Needs. I'm not on welfare. My grandma is, but we have enough funds and compassion to care for her if she'd only let us. In addition, it is government policies that prevent me from being as self-sufficient from the land as my Cherokee and Comanche ancestors were.
• The Postal Service. UPS, a private organization, delivers my belongings much more efficiently and accurately than the United States Postal Service. Just sayin'.
• Am I missing anything? I'm sure I can go without that, too.

 

Yes... I do indeed realize what I would miss out on if I terminated my unwilling contract with the federal government. I have weighed the pros and cons, and I have judged government to be utterly superfluous to my survival and well-being.

 

 

I'm interested in this experiment of yours, though I have reservations about whether it's truly anarchist in spirit. Honestly, I'm much more interested in this friend of yours and his opinions on government.

 

 

 

That's why we love it, Voidus. 

I think what I really want is massive changes in government policy, to a point where I am not legally obligated (Well, I'm not paying taxes yet, but you get my point.  ) to support institutions and conflicts which I absolutely abhor. With countries of the size that exist, anarchy is not very likely, so I advocate reform instead.

As much as I dislike labeling myself, as I think compartmentalizing people often leads to 'ingroup-outgroup' phenomenon, at this point I consider myself to be a democratic socialist. This may seem to be in stark contrast with my previously expressed opinions, but I think that a system where people contribute for the good of all (e.g : infrastructure, social security) is actually quite similar to an instance of a small town working together to make things better, just on a larger, more organized scale.

The problems come when that institution uses our contribution to do things like incarcerate large percentages of the population, start wars for terrible reasons, and spend massive amounts of money creating unnecessary military equipment. I think that the best we can do, right now, is eliminate as many faults as we can and make the flawed system less flawed.

 

 

I'm more of a separatist, myself. I don't have much hope in changing society, so I mostly separate myself from it, try not to rely on it, and contribute to it as little as I can. I wish I could declare my cabin the sovereign state of Jaredonia, free of all the outside world's politics and governances, but as that's not possible I'll just stick to complaining about the government on the Internet.

 

Really, in an ideal world I'd support socialism. No concept of personal property, no currency, no economy... just a small community looking out for each other. Truth be told, many small tribes like the San people of Africa live much like that, and at times I wish I'd been born into their culture.

 

I certainly agree with you on the incarceration of so much of our population. Like I said in a conversation at church yesterday--"I don't trust any civilization that spends more money on its prisons than its libraries."

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles she/her]

It means that your employer is an idiot and can't math.

 

Yeaaaaaahhhhh…...

[Mashadar Mistborn he/him]

I'll chime in quickly and say I'm something akin to a communist and that once again 17th Shard is apparently the only place on the entire internet where things like this can be discussed without starting a flame war.

Which is why this is the only internet society that I am a part of. You guys are all wonderful and can *gasp* accept other people and their opinions without agreeing.

[Voidus]

That's why we love it, Voidus.

I think what I really want is massive changes in government policy, to a point where I am not legally obligated (Well, I'm not paying taxes yet, but you get my point. ) to support institutions and conflicts which I absolutely abhor. With countries of the size that exist, anarchy is not very likely, so I advocate reform instead.

As much as I dislike labeling myself, as I think compartmentalizing people often leads to 'ingroup-outgroup' phenomenon, at this point I consider myself to be a democratic socialist. This may seem to be in stark contrast with my previously expressed opinions, but I think that a system where people contribute for the good of all (e.g : infrastructure, social security) is actually quite similar to an instance of a small town working together to make things better, just on a larger, more organized scale.

• The problems come when that institution uses our contribution to do things like incarcerate large percentages of the population, start wars for terrible reasons, and spend massive amounts of money creating unnecessary military equipment. I think that the best we can do, right now, is eliminate as many faults as we can and make the flawed system less flawed.

I originally read this as 'Star wars has terrible reasons'

Then Kobold mentioned being a separatist so not only is he a supervillain but one who has ties to count dooku. 

[DreamEternal]

I am afraid I cannot simply abstain from this discussion without replying even once. And when I get passionate about something I find it hard to be subtle, so I am sorry if this sounds rude.

However, I must say that I am firmly in a pro-government side, however corrupt or inneficient it may be, and find a true anarchist society to be impossible and undesirable. I will focus this post on Kobold's list:

Let's see... what would I lose if I severed my connection to the government?

Law enforcement. I believe I've already made the case for the law enforcement of my community being completely, 100% useless. They weren't there for me when I was shot at by ruffians, and they won't be there next time it happens either. I have no use for such an agency.

In your hypothetical anarchist society, how would be crime dealt with then? What would stop criminal from setting themselves as local lords?

Education. I'm homeschooled, as is my family. Next.

It is wonderful home schooling worked for you, but I doubt it can work in every family out there.

Roads. I don't like roads. They pave over the landscape, turning once pristine wilderness into asphalt lines of death. I want to see the roads fall into disrepair and erode away, so we can go back to natural transportation like donkeys. If for whatever reason a community decides that it absolutely must have roads, then volunteers can maintain it for them. I for one won't shed any tears over it.

So your community produces all it needs on its own? And it is invulnerable to anything that may hamper or destroy such capacity in the local area?

National Security. This is a big deal, and it is the reason the Founding Fathers supported government. In the Federalist Papers they maintained that a strong central government was essential for standing firm against foreign invaders. To me, however, this is much like summoning Cthulhu to fend off Godzilla. There's no point in repelling tyrants from overseas if you're going to surrender to tyrants here at home. I refuse to run into the arms of one evil out of fear of another.

A new tyrant is generaly worse than a old one, either for having even less reason to care for your well-being or for the shear damage it will do by conquering.

(A side note: a people that doesn't want to be conquered will not be conquered.

Maybe, but a lot of them will be killed. And some consider it better to bow under a tyrant than to die for freedom, depending on how bad the tyrant is.

Vital Needs. I'm not on welfare. My grandma is, but we have enough funds and compassion to care for her if she'd only let us. In addition, it is government policies that prevent me from being as self-sufficient from the land as my Cherokee and Comanche ancestors were.

Not everyone has such compassionate family and community.

Again, I hope this does not sound rude, but that is what I thought.

Edited October 12, 2015 by CognitivePulsePattern

[Voidus]

I think we can all agree that the truly best form of governing a society is to have a pugerment where the entire world is just ruled by Twi's pugs.
I mean come on, they bring people shoes, that's about 1000x more helpful than most governments.