jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (23 posts)

Order vs Chaos

  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Which do you prefer?

    1. Credence2 profile image84
      Credence2posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Order with freedom from tyranny.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        +1
        Freedom from tyranny exists in the laws of the Constitution.

        1. oceansnsunsets profile image90
          oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          +1

          Good point.  My answer is order.  With order, you can get so much more done, and chaos well, just leads to breakdown, and not a much that is good.  You tend to get more chaos, even darkness. 

          As for the constitution, we ought to stick close to those ideas.  We need to ask when people struggle with it, what would explain that.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I agree.

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    For instance, in our government there are strict guidelines controlling the actions of the Federal Government. An Oath of Office is taken as the incoming President's hand is placed on the Bible. He promises to uphold and protect laws of the Constitution. The President's honesty the only thing which protects the people from usurpation of their Constitutionally granted authority.
    Order results with such honesty.
    Chaos results without it.
    Why?
    Because the Constitution is a very carefully contemplated Document. Most people cannot fathom its relevance to the human condition.

    "It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force." The Federalist No.1: Hamilton. The Federalist Papers. 1787.

  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Many misguided choices in this nation have the potential to cause chaos.
    I believe we must resist whatever would result in chaos. Such as:

    *Welfare fraud
    *Social security fraud
    *Electing or reelecting those who do not have the citizens' best interests.
    *Reelecting people who break the laws.
    *Removing the borders of Canada and Mexico.
    *Electing those who believe in amnesty for "undocumented workers" and people who sneak across our borders.
    *Hating our neighbors, racism.
    *Government control of school curriculum.
    *Overburdensome taxes.
    *Allowing appointed officials to by-pass Congress in stipulating regulations, i.e. EPA and Eminent Domain
    *Socialization of Healthcare Insurance, i.e. ACA.
    *Illegal fines imposed by the govt.
    *etc.

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    I do not believe we should scrap the Constitution, (and all it stands for in a democratic republic,) in favor of other forms of government, (that are based on social democracy, communism, anarchism etc.)
    The Constitution guarantees of superior form of government if understood and implemented properly.


    Good government = order based on laws and justice.
    Bad government = chaos or an unraveling of vital social systems based on law and justice.

    Here is my ultimate question:
    Q. No government =_______ ?
    Could it ever equal order?
    I would think it naturally equals chaos: Lawlessness, a lack of laws or law enforcement which would result in no justice.

    "Government implies the power of making laws. It is essential to the idea of a law, that it be attended with a sanction; or, in other words, a penalty or punishment for disobedience. If there be no penalty annexed to disobedience, the resolutions or commands which pretend to be laws will, in fact, amount to nothing more than advice or recommendation." Federalist No. 15 Hamilton.

    "Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice, without constraint." Federalist No. 15 Hamilton.

  5. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Belief in God coming from either faith and/or knowledge, (based on any legitimate religion bringing forth the truth of reality,) is valuable in promoting order.

    Belief in God coming from selfish evil agendas (of extremists) brings about chaos.

  6. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Boundaries and laws promote freedom. Freedom requires boundaries and boundaries, especially too many and too restrictive, are detrimental…

                                 unless they protect freedom and independence.


    Protecting freedom is subtle and takes understanding. Whoever criticizes the creators of our Constitution does not love freedom. Whoever criticizes the Belief in God does not love goodness.
    Whoever criticizes the Constitution and our Creator loves chaos and all it brings forth.

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Kathryn, I must take you to task on your rather simplistic view of things!

      I am not American and so feel totally free to criticise your constitution, or rather the ability to take it or leave it depending on how it coincides with a persons viewpoint, that does not mean that I do not love freedom and I'm quite sure that it is perfectly possible for Americans to criticise your constitution and still love freedom. As for criticising the creators of your constitution-were they then totally flawless?

      I do not believe in your god (along with a very large percentage of the worlds population) I do however love goodness in as much as one can love a concept.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I am trying to get a discussion going about Political Anarchism. Its not working.
        What are the "Natural Laws Of Anarchism?
        Anybody know?
        How do they conflict with our Constitution?

        1. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I suggest that you have a look at Somalia.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Really?
            what about Somalia?
            PS  The Forum Discussion's main proponent of Anarchism is currently resting in peace.
            This posting was in response to his non-response in regards to Anarchism. On a knee jerk reaction level I just don't see how Anarchism could work. Do you? I can't even bring myself to read about it.

            - of course Hamilton had his flaws, but they were on a personal level. He understood human nature very well, as did the original framers… including Madison, Jefferson, and Adams. They knew man is full of vices and sought to deal with:
            1. Freedom in society within appropriate boundaries (law and order.)
            2. Elected officials held in check by those who elect them. (Vote out the bad ones…impeachment)
            3. Balance of power within the government. (separation of branches which serves to check one another)
            4. Freedom of Religion along with Freedom from tyranny of Religion. (by separating church from state.)

            Anarchism seems to be just freedom. What promotes necessary boundaries to human behavior which is ever infallible unless anchored in the Divine?
            (which, we are not exactly angels wearing halos all the time.)

            The problem seen today Here in US is "we the people" not being educated properly in regards to our power and not holding our elected officials accountable.

            We are starting to acquire a victim mentality. We need to power up.

            TWISI
            Pardon My Sanity

            1. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Somalia is anarchist in having no central government. It also has extremes of wealth and poverty.

        2. cjhunsinger profile image69
          cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Kathryn
          I don't think that you will get much debate here as anarchy cannot be defended.
          Natural Law does not apply to such ideals as it does not apply to our Constitution. Physics is not in the Constitution, but reason from the mind of man is.
          I would say that the best that can be said of anarchy is that it speaks to a time, perhaps, in the far distant future where Man is much more intelligent and self reliant. A Man who does not want something for nothing and who recognizes the inherent sovereignty of the individual. This is an ideal best put forward in the American Constitution and, perhaps, the greatest document ever written by the hand of Man.

          1. John Holden profile image60
            John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            What? Greater than Magna Carta which it was based on?

            1. cjhunsinger profile image69
              cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Yes!

              1. John Holden profile image60
                John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Wow!

  7. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Here is a hint.
    "The weal of mankind, as the future will and must make plain, depends upon communism. The system of communism logically excludes any and every relation between master and servant, and means really Anarchism, and the way to this goal leads through a social revolution." Anarchy Defended by Anarchists

    by John Most and Emma Goldman


    http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/ANARCHIST_AR … tgold.html

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      "When once free from the restrictions of extraneous authority, men will enter into free relations; spontaneous organizations will spring up in all parts of the world, and every one will contribute to his and the common welfare as much labor as he or she is capable of, and consume according to their needs. All modern technical inventions and discoveries will be employed to make work easy and pleasant, and science, culture, and art will be freely used to perfect and elevate the human race, while woman will be coequal with man.

      "This is all well said," replies some one, "but people are not angels, men are selfish."

      What about? Selfishness is not a crime; it only becomes a crime when conditions are such as to give an individual the opportunity to satisfy his selfishness to the detriment of others. In an anarchistic society everyone will seek to satisfy his ego; but as Mother Nature has so arranged things that only those survive who have the aid of their neighbors, man, in order to satisfy his ego, will extend his aid to those who will aid him, and then selfishness will no more be a curse but a blessing."

      BUT HOW?

  8. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    "Order maintained by submission and maintained by terror is not much of a safe guarantee. Yet, that is the only order that governments have ever maintained," said Emma Goldman.

    Some think submission has and is being maintained by terror here in America.

    Q. Is it?

  9. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    "Student groups have been calling for a free vote in the Chinese controlled city through largely peaceful demonstrations dubbed the "Umbrella Movement".

    Chief Executive C.Y. Leung, who has branded the protests illegal, has rejected calls for more talks on political reform and warned protesters not to turn to violence when the clearance starts.

    Police are expected to clear the sites on Thursday with over 3,000 officers, the South China Morning Post newspaper reported, citing police sources.

    Protesters on the ground have thinned considerably to under 100 with most of the hundreds of tents pitched on the camp site empty. At their peak, the rallies drew more than 100,000."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_ … ral_reform

 
working