LibriumArcana.Games

In the past, I have argued that government, any government is better than none, but recently, there was one thing that gave me pause: the fundamentalist regimes in the middle east.

They look to me like complete hellholes. Violent, oppressive, unstable. You'd be unable to cross the border, and may be conscripted into a Jihad army.

However, life in anarchy would be, as Thomas Hobbs put it, "brutish, nasty and short". There would be no order of any kind; a hellhole with violent warlords killing their way into power.

If you were forced to relocate to an oppressive fundamentalist nation, or a country with no government or a weak government, which one would you choose?

Anarchy... because it would probably be fun for a few minutes, as opposed to the Taliban which isn't fun at all for any amount of time.

Anarchy. I just need to get a lot of weapons and find a place to fortify to stay safe or try to get out. If I get the reputation that people who try to mess with me find themselves dead, then people will leave me alone. Maybe I could even escape.

I'm a woman. The fundies always go after the women. If I try to defend myself or fight back, they'll come and get me, no matter how many people I take down (and they'll be honored as martyrs, so there's no reason for them not to come after me). Escape would be far, far more difficult without a way to defend myself or fight back.

Want to revise my question a bit to add 3 separate scenarios:

1) You are born into the place you choose and have to live out your life under that government (or lack of government).

2) You are magically transported there, but still being a citizen of your home nation. This fact would be known to those around you.

3) You are magically transported there with all knowledge you currently have, including what life is like under your home government, but no one else knows this: to everyone else, you have lived under this regime all your life.

This reminds me of a joke.

A Guy is talking to his wife, asking if he should wear his Armonni Suit or just jeans and a t-shirt to the IRS audit. She says, "Well, let me tell ya what my Grandma told me on my wedding night. Doesn't matter if ya wear pajama's or a silky night gown, either way, your screwed."

Anarchy. I always prefer chaotic situation because it gives more opportunities; who knows I could be a rich arms dealer or such?

Anarchary does not last more than 10 minutes. Look at Solmalia, it is not anarchary, it is a patchwork of theocrats and feudal warlords. If nothing else if you're strong and smart enough you can carve out a life that somewhat suits or at least doesn't completely suck. The downside is if you're not, you're as good as cattle.

However in a Taliban regieme... Everyone is as good as cattle.

you know why the rules of chiverly where created right? To keep the youth in line. Espeically boys who liked to steal rape and kill. Sad but true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chivalry

And this has what to do with the topic Sama?

1. Gotta go with anarchy....I can live better by killing my way to the top

2. Anarchy again....being American would make me a target in a taliban like regime and I dont know how many people it would take to come for me....but I know how many they are going to use.

3.Anarchy with a land slide victory. With all the knowledge that I have and with no one suspicous I still couldnt be in any kind of fundimentalist opression country,I wouldnt last 5 min before I snapped and broke every religious law around. I am a godless American...I enjoy my vices, they make me happy, I would love to be more religious if i didnt have so many people telling me "If its fun, its probably a sin....so dont do it - But it will all pay out in the end"

frigidmagi wrote:And this has what to do with the topic Sama?

Medivel times. Anarchy. Etc. This was a coping method. LIving in a time like that. You would have to deal with marauders. Stupid kids gettign drunk and bruning your house down. lots of nasty stuff.

Medieval times were not anarchy Sama, they were feudal times. Anarchy would have no overarching moral codes.

frigidmagi wrote:Medieval times were not anarchy Sama, they were feudal times. Anarchy would have no overarching moral codes.

the code was created to deal with it. Any anarchy won't last long. Like you said. It would either turn into a feudal system or another form of goverment.
It's funny people mention being arms dealers etc. Where will they get the weapons? Will they craft them? Do they even have the skills needed to live in a society where your dirt unles you have $ and power? Anything they acquire is fair game to the regiem or their neighbours.
I remember a talk about feudal combat. If you went by yourself you where dead. A knight would have support. Even thieves had support. One guy would be fighting you directly. His men would then assit and help in cutting you down. LIfe is rarely if ever fair.

The way I see it is to play dumb, and keep your mouth shut and Get their trust. Once they see you as aloyal citizen and trusted ally Leave the country on offical business. you ditch your mission, get political assylum and never look back. I know people who have done that. It works just fine.

Seeing as afghan smiths have made AK-47s with forges... It can be done as long as you know how.

frigidmagi wrote:Seeing as afghan smiths have made AK-47s with forges... It can be done as long as you know how.

Yes. But you need the knowledge. Materials. resources. Where will they get all of that? I have worked metal shop before. Theoretically i could do it but i doubt i'd produce anything quality for a while. YOu would need to get the metal. then forge it, have a place to forge it. The chemicals to make gun powder etc. It's not as if they would have google and wikipedia at their disposal. They would need to first establish their core essentials.
#1 a place to sleep
#2 source of food
#3 means to protect yourself
too many issues to deal with.

Ali if a bunch of Afghani tribesmen can do it I imagine it can be done anywhere else on the planet. I mean have you seen Afghanistan? It's not excaltly the most loving local on the planet for human life and civilization. Even in a fuedal society there is trade and there are craftsman, otherwise what has happened is a reversion to the stone age and that's a seperate topic all togather.

frigidmagi wrote:Ali if a bunch of Afghani tribesmen can do it I imagine it can be done anywhere else on the planet. I mean have you seen Afghanistan? It's not excaltly the most loving local on the planet for human life and civilization. Even in a fuedal society there is trade and there are craftsman, otherwise what has happened is a reversion to the stone age and that's a seperate topic all togather.

Then they need to make friends and dig in.
you need friends and fast. If your not usefull then you die. YOU need skills to be usefull. If this was set in modenr times. The best you can hope for is your current job or an equivilant. Unless you learn fast and get relly lucky

Both societies have an equal approche. Work within the system. Acquire ameans to leave it and do so. the only issue is with survivability. The less resons you give a person to kill you the better in both cases.

Yeah. I know afganistan. The city i was born in was inear the border of iran and afganistan. I also have alot of old family friends from there.
I was in iran when the stupid revolution happend. We left in 1981.


Anyhow. it's my opinion. I am not sayin gyour wrong. Mine differs but it;s equally as valid. I don't see a diffrence between the two as far as supression people's right. In one you have a religiouse nut in the other you can have either a religios nut. a duke. king etc. All of which are power monger who could give a shit about your wellfare.

I also don't see computer geeks becomig rambos or expert craftsmen overnight.
I coudl draw naked chicks for a living in the anarchy rofl.

I'm an ex-marine, Rambo was a whining emo wuss. Villege Idiot is trained medical personnal.

And you managed to address none of my points on how things actually work.

Dark Silver wrote:Bring this thread back on topic. Immediatly.

Ali, your initial posts have nothing to do witht he topic of this thread, the medievil age was NOT anarchy, it was fuedal based with royalty and what not.

This does not equal anarchy, which has no over-riding rule or moral code.


The discussion of the Knightly Code and "Courtly Romance" do not fit with the proposed topic of this discussion. Stop sidetracking things. That's your warning.

Oh, and if your going to get into a debate, ANSWER THE FUCKING POINTS PRO-OFFERED! This is basic shit, even a five year old can figure it out. I won't let bullshit debating tactics go through on my board.

I appologize for miscommunation on my part. The joke was meant to show y opinion. The woman says, Does it matter, either way your screwed. Which is what I was trying to convey. I'll step away from this topic and appologize again.

Ali Sama wrote:I appologize for miscommunation on my part. The joke was meant to show y opinion. The woman says, Does it matter, either way your screwed. Which is what I was trying to convey. I'll step away from this topic and appologize again.

I would venture to guess that it's not the joke that got you in bad graces with TPTB, but rather when you started wandering off babbling about chivalry and whatnot.




As for me, I'd go for anarchy for the second two scenarios. With those, I can go with the same things other people have been saying and point out that I'm hopefully smart enough to carve out some territory or kiss enough butt to have a comfortable place in someone else's service.

As for the first, I think I would have to go against the norm and pick an Islamic regime. If I was born there, I wouldn't know differently, and if I grew up with the same amount of intelligence I have now, I think I would be able to live a comfortable life under that system, and possibly even rise high enough that I can get away with things that would be sins for lesser men.