Staredit Network

Again, you fail to read the reply.

Just because the political side of things would be destroyed, does not mean ALL OTHER AUTHORITIES (Policemen) would be destroyed as well.

-_-

You said in your earlier reply that only politicians wouldn't be there, but policeman would.

Exactly.

Leave right now. You're spamming the discussion with your pathetic "arguments"

Chaos:
"A condition or place of great disorder or confusion."
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=chaos

Anarchy:
"Political disorder and confusion."
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anarchy

I never said they were the same. I just used chaos as an adjective.

Is this just wishful thinking, or do you really think this could happen?

Notice the bolded word.



Do you see the word, place, within there?

I thought not.

Quit trying to use chaos in symmetry with Anarchy because they are not the same thing.

ADDITION:


If you would have read, Anarchy happens after Revolution.

How many have there been of those?

American, French and Russian are a few to name off.

I never said they were. Chaos can be used as an adjective for confusion, because Anarchy just so happens to have part of it's definition down as confusion.

BTW, how does that techinical attempt supposed to help your argument?

America had a government during and after the revolution, all of them did the only one that comes close was the French revolution.

You are the only one to use the word Chaos as an adjective for confusion that I know of. It's usually used for adjectives describing something of pure and utterly degraded things.

And what are you talking about when you speak of, "my technical argument"?

ADDITION:


Articles of Confederation, is not a government.

If there was a government, why were taxes and terrifs different for all states then, eh?

And who was the president before the revolution? Answer that one, bright one.

There doesn't have to be a president (even though I'm sure there was a leader during the revolution, probably Samuel Adams) there were still politicians from the different colonies meeting together during the revolution and after.

Huh? It was a government. Not a good one, but better than pure anarchy.

Uh, no. Samuel Adams is a beer company, stupid doo doo head.

And with governments, there has to be a chamber of leaders and or one leader.

The colonies had poor leaders. They followed standardised rules created by the governers, who also ran the trade.

The United States had no government until the Constitution was ratified, and George Washington became the first president.

Please refrain from posting here. You're spamming the topic with nonesense.

ADDITION:
Explain how it was a government?

It was a form of Anarchy. Politics were in disorder, and confusion; Hence, Anarchy.

lmao Samuel Adams was a founding father (why do you think theree's a 17th century guy on the bottle)
Still though they were politicians meeting poor leaders or not, it still ratifies as a substitute government.

The government was so bad, it was border line anarchy. Not much executive power going on. Yes there was no CENTRAL government, but it still had governments. It was a confederacy, meaning each state was independant. Each state had it's own government.

Which still is a government with currency and laws, and still had leaders that were politicians, just because it was poor in ruling still doesn't make it an anarchy.

Wkiki pwns you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Adams

Not a founding father, sorry. stupid doo doo head.



But it was not one nation; Thus, making it a form of anarchy.





Politcal disorder, and confusion. They were confused! As Loser likes to put iy:

Thus, making them inside of a CONFUSED STATE; Hence, ANARCHY

That's not the main reason why there was anarchy. It was the high amount of crimes going on, and the economy sucked. All this does, is prove how bad anarchies are. Anarchies are not goals, they're obstacles.

Go find some little thing I was wrong on, and just prove me wrong on it. Whatever makes you sleep better at night. I'm going to bed. Peace.

Crimes and economical depression are Chaos. Not caused by Anarchy. So why try to blame it on anarchy?

Oh. I forgot. You're right no matter how many times i've proven you wrong.

you need to research more

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fath...e_United_States

There were still governments within the colonies still being led by politicians.

He isn't a founding father. Just because he signed the declaration of independance, doesn't make him an actual FOUNDING father.

The ones who signed the constitution, are the founding fathers.

Enough with your spam. Leave. You're off topic.

On Topic:

Again I say: Crimes and economical depression are Chaos. Not caused by Anarchy. So why try to blame it on anarchy?

Oh. I forgot. You're right no matter how many times i've proven you wrong.

Fine then, what about government employees (fireman policemen garbagemen etc..) how will they get paid they won't risk there lives or work in nasty places for free.

Again you fail to comprehend how authorities other than the government works.

There will be no government. Which means no state. Which means free money to all the state funded things, for there is no state to withold the money from them.

Please quit spamming. It's not nice.

Then whats the point of currency, who regulates it, what makes it special now?

Currency is ran by the fabricated lies of the government.

If there was no government, there would be no one to regulate it; Thus, causing profit for everyone. And it's not special, because it is showing you exactly how far you are in debt.

So it would just spu freely to everyone?

If that is so why are the (former) government employees working for useless pieces of paper?