Oppressive government is more desirable than

As humans we have sh nuclear number 18d organic needs. To meet this need we mustiness prenominal click off our safety from the forcefulness of each other and from the furiousness of deal who are not members of our society. The mechanism to serve.

Oppressive government is more desirable than

As humans we have shared fundamental needs. Take personal survival as an example. To meet this need we must ensure our safety from the violence of each other and from the violence of people who are not members of our society.

The mechanism to serve. Government is the exercise of authority in a political unit. Desirable is defined as worth having or seeking, as by being useful or advantageous. Since the topic asks us to evaluate the most desirable situation for humanity, my Value Premise is Individual Welfare.

In order to achieve individual welfare, my criteria are 1 The preservation of social order 2 The fulfillment of fundamental needs.

Oppressive government is more desirable than

The only way in which to ensure individual welfare is to maintain societal stability while at the same time protecting the individual. My first contention is that an oppressive government is more desirable than no government because government, in any form, provides certain advantages that are impossible for the state of nature to provide.

In other words, the mere existence of a government allows for society as a whole to have a defense mechanism against foreign powers because agovernment must provide such protection in order to preserve itself. The absence of a government, however, would leave individuals defenseless from outside aggressors.

Oppressive government is more desirable than

Any government, oppressive or not, provides for this basic external security, which is a prerequisite to securing fundamental needs. Even if some order exists without government, it cannot be maintained for any significant period of time because conflicts will inevitably occur over finite resources.

Thus oppressive governments provide for the protection of fundamental needs that individuals lack in the state of nature due to the lack of adjudication. Oppressive governments are not primarily concerned with taking away life because by systematically killing all of their subjects, such governments would be diminishing their own power.

Thus individuals at least know how to secure their rights under oppression whereas in the state of nature, no such method to protect rights exists. Oppressive systems therefore generally ensure protection of life because individuals know how to avoid any governmental encroachments.

Thus society under an oppressive government is more desirable because it ensures a minimum protection of rights that the negative can in no way ensure.

My second contention is that an oppressive government is more desirable than no government because society with an oppressive government is more conducive to reform.

If we examine the topic, oppression is going to occur on both sides. Under an oppressive government, all individuals know who their common enemy is, and they are aware of the origin of the threat to their liberty.

Simply because of this awareness, individuals are able to unite more effectively against this one consolidation of power. The absence of a government allows for conflicts to exist on many levels.

Individuals, groups, and organizations would constantly be involved in variety of struggles, and each group would be vying for its own selfish interests. The state of nature is therefore characterized by a lack of unity.

Because individuals are so divided in this state of nature, it becomes virtually impossible to unite and achieve a consensus on establishing a government.

Thus the lack of unification hinders the pursuit of establishing a just system.Thus society under an oppressive government is more desirable because it ensures a minimum protection of rights that the negative can in no way ensure.

My second contention is that an oppressive government is more desirable than no government because society with an oppressive government is more conducive to reform. Because I agree with Thomas Attig, I must affirm the topic that ‘an oppressive government is more desirable than no government.’ Before I continue, I’d like to define a few key terms in the topic.

Speech on Oppressive Governments vs. No Government at All Essay Example | Graduateway

[All definitions are from American Heritage.] Oppressive is defined as unjust or difficult to bear. Explore the pros and cons of the debate Resolved: Oppressive government is more desirable than no government. An oppressive government Is more desirable than no government at all - Speech on Oppressive Governments vs.

No Government at All introduction. Hello everyone, my name is Christopher Eden and I am the affirmative side of this debate. Jul 16,  · "No Government" in societies of greater than or so people will inevitably result in the creation of government unless ROB fiat is applied.

"No Government" in societies of or less people will reduce your society to hunter gatherer levels unless ROB fiat is applied. Oppressive government is more desirable than no government at all?Debate: An Oppressive government is more desirable than no government at all Argument: An oppressive government provides safety and asylum while man in a natural state without government is not assured these things, and is also therefore denied peace.

Oppressive Government vs. No Government? | SpaceBattles Forums