RE: Anarchy is not the Entire Answer. It Really Begins with Ahimsa
Come on, all of these ideas are unfeasible because of human nature, as far as I understand anarchy is no government, which is actually what democracy and communism are in their original form, and you just look at how they turned out, democracy is impossible, the best you can get is a representative democracy were you vote for a few people who will decide for you, what is mostly happening in the developed countries. Communism despite all it's ideals ends up in totalitarian states. Take a democratically derived vote like the UK leaving the EU, what happened? You ended up with a polarized country were half the people loathe the other half. It doesn't work, only way we could have a better fairer earth would be if people actually entered a higher state of consciousness and good luck with that, people are of themselves selfish and envious, you can try to talk yourself into saying this isn't so but you are only fooling yourself. A case in point if you read this you will instantly start seeing all the ways that my reasoning is wrong and yours is right. So right there we have two people who can't agree on something, and this just gets bigger and bigger the more people are involved. And right there is where the violence starts.
Ahimsa is a prerequisite to creating a free environment. To have true freedom, violence must end by our free will. @happyhealthyhigh's comment shows us how our human nature can allow for that. If you read Dan's article, my article, and happyhealthyhigh's comment, the point being made is a simple one, so simple that we knew it as children. Non-violence is the way to achieve freedom. Non-violence is the way it is feasible. To look on human nature as inherently violent is to fall into the trap of thinking that creates a perceived need to be protected by the state. Getting caught up in a semantic argument is easy to do, but it does not make peace and understanding unfeasible. I appreciate a debate in which people give their reasoning to back up their point of view. Often it is not heard, but when it is, there can actually be a real exchange of ideas and that is valuable.
Well floweroflife I am completely ignorant as to Ahimsa, so I have to read up on it to be able to have any opinion on it. But remember we are just putting forward ideas, I am in no way trying to antagonize anyone, your ideas are just as valid as mine.