Here you go guys Have fun with this one

Anarchy for the win!

Here in Nigeria, we are living the worst of both sides. The laws don't work, if someone does you dirty and you call the police, you're just wasting your time. And we don't have the freedom that comes with Anarchy, the government will easily clamp you down if you move a certain type of way. And the economic hardship that comes with both scenarios, we have that too.

Anarchy will be better because you will always find other people that want to live with security and it will be very easy to form a group of people with the same ideas compared to authoritarian government where people is already programmed to be a certain way

I said authoritarianism within a couple seconds. I'll be the unpopular one here.

Anarchy would be a bumpy transition but within a generation it would work itself out. Anarchy for the win!

For myself id lean towards Anarchy. But as a society and as a country or even species authoritarian is probably safer long term

It's interesting, anarchy just leads to authoritarianism while authoritarianism leads to anarchy. With true anarchy, it's just a matter of time before a warlord or a cult creates the illusion of a society.

Its a false dichotomy, but within that I will take mad max over 1984 all day every day.

The answer is actually pretty easy.

😆

And people start losing their minds

As our authoritarian government is heavily biased against me I choose anarchy. I could join up with my own and we would build order while destroying chaos. I don't have an ego attachment to liberty, it's just in my best interest at this point. I'd be fine with an authoritarian that sided with me and my values.

Within a month of anarchy, the .01% of people who are causing the majority of the problems will have been eliminated. This will be a solid message for the rest and we can get on with building society wo the epstien or gangsta classes involved

He frames anarchy as chaos and control by criminal gangs, but that's precisely what government produces. The only reliable thing under the state is that you will be robbed continuously, from every conceivable angle, for the rest of your days. Dangerous freedom > gay slavery.

Trouble with anarchy is that it would only be a matter of time before some warlord created the authoritarian regime. And the trouble with authoritarian regimes is that they might spawn resistance movements that can lead to anarchy. So at the end of the day: who cares? They lead to the same place.

Its weird how they have to depict anarchy as violent and "sinful" to make the decision fair, im not even an anarchist but Id choose anarchy.

dangerous freedom it is.

The fact they are economically equal suggests the anarchy has some unwritten social order. I would therefore prefer anarchy. The emotionally unbalanced or mentally unwell, aren't going to last very long. With nobody to stop it, somebody's going to take them out. Problem solved.

Anarchy. Just means without hierarchy. We aren’t too far from it already.

Anarchy would quickly turn into a bunch of mini-authoritarian governments as people join gangs and claim territory. Eventually some of those gangs would join up and there would be wars until one group takes all.

I guess I’m a pycho because I prefer Anarchy 🤪

It's the dude version of "the bear or the man"

It's a stupid thought experiment. One actually exists, North Korea, the vast majority would say anything but that.

Anarchy. Because it's not that different from current America. Where criminals run the nation. At least in Anarchy if I defend myself I won't be demonized for it.

It gets me people are so scared of anarchy Have you ever stood in a line? Congrats you’ve experienced anarchy in action Or did someone have to tell you where to stand, and when to move up?

Far extreme anarchy ❤️… than being watched day/night

Why humans reproduce way less under authoritarian system to the point of extinction? Human nature is dependent on reproduction, if somehitng makes you reproduce less, how this behavior will continue to exist? authoritarianism is a trap biologically.

i fear direct democracy more personally.

All civilizations begin as a loose conclave of hearty peoples, but they ultimately disintegrate when society centralizes power to extremes. The Western frontier of 19th-century America was a perfect example of how it begins, and the collapse of the Soviet Union on how it ends.

This is very polarising I don’t want either

Yhr problem with this question is it ignores one fundamental question: “who is the authrotarian” Living under a well qualified authoritarian like Lee Kuan Yew, Khama, or Ataturk is different from living under an erratic psycho like Hitler, Stalin, Mobutu, Amin, or Trump!

I would choose anarchy, because under anarchy you could create a new microsociety that had better rules, because true anarchy doesn't exist, everyone has right and wrong programmed into them, so using cause and effect, you would have better chances in anarchy.

The authoritarian government would NEVER last… The first Chinese Empire arose following 250 years of continual war - it was the Qin Dynasty. It had layers and layers of laws - and for this reason it only lasted 15 years… It was followed by the Han Dynasty - which repealed almost all the laws - except for like don’t steal don’t murder. The British philosopher Alan Watts said it was near anarchy. The Han lasted 400 years - and it was a high point in Chinese culture… Lao Tzu in the Tao Te Ching described both these outcomes… There is an ancient Chinese concept of the Mandate of Heaven - a divine overthrow of an oppressive government when it does not serve the people. Something simular was described by the Scottish presbyterian minister Samuel Rutherford in his book Lex Rex (The Law Is King) - that it doesn’t matter if you have a monarchy, an aristocracy, or a democracy of the 51% majority - there is a higher divine law that all those governmental forms are beholden to. Lex Rex was in the personal libraries of all the founding fathers of the United States…