Anarchy Works!

Guest Post by Eric Peters

“Anarchy” is one of those words that many people react to emotionally – having been conditioned to do so.anarchy lead

The word has become generally synonymous with chaos and disorder. Dog eat dog. As EPautos’ king troll (Clover; see here for more about him) puts it, anarchy means “do whatever the hell you like.”

Well, no.

Anarchy, strictly defined, means simply the absence of government.

It does not mean people won’t – much less can’t – govern themselves.

The fact is most people do exactly that.

And they do it without government.

Already.what government does

Do you need government – its threats and laws – to keep you from taking a ball peen hammer to your neighbor’s head? Would you transform, like Wolfman, into a run-amok creature “doing whatever the  hell you like” if Congress, the president and every federal and state bureaucrat got Jesus Hoovered into the sky tomorrow?

Probably not.

Well, you might do many things currently not legal.

There are many possibilities – given that almost everything is currently illegal unless done precisely the way the government demands it be done.

But it’s not likely you’d become a murderer or a thief, even if government disappeared tomorrow. Because you – like most people – are capable of self-government. Have no desire to hurt others and so try to avoid doing so, law or no law.

Which is what anarchy’s all about.what is anarchy?

It does not mean the absence of rules or order.

It certainly does not mean chaos.

That is merely the bogeyman presented by those hoping to delegitimize opposition to top-down control of every last detail of our lives by remote, centralized authority. It’s not unlike the scarecrow in Wizard of Oz. He did not need the Wizard to give him a brain; he already had one.

Similarly, people are capable of self-government without needing government.

Do you behave a certain way when you are a guest in someone’s home? Do you behave that way because of government? Or because you self-govern?

Consider your interactions with neighbors and friends and co-workers. Are you only behaving decently because you dread “the law”?

Would you rip-off your customers if there were no law that said otherwise? Beat your children? “Do whatever the hell you liked”… regardless of consequences, no matter who you hurt?

Of course not.anarchy 2

Because like most people, you are probably not a narcissist or a sociopath or a psychopath. Such people are, according to academic studies of the matter, always a small minority of the general population. You will, however, encounter them regularly in government, which attracts defective people afflicted by the sick desire to lord it over others.

Which brings up an interesting point.

The critic of anarchism argues that people not under the yoke of a government will “do whatever the hell they like.” That is, they will not practice self-government. But who comprises the government? People! The same people (one assumes, unless we are talking about a new species) who are, according to the critic, prone to “doing whatever the hell they like.” Only now, these people are organized into a mighty gang – armed and anointed with the legal authority to “do whatever the hell they like.” 

Which of course they tend to do.

Exponentially.charlie brown

Narcissism and sociopathy plus power usually results in big problems. The Holocaust or the Killing Fields or the Trail of Tears or the Iron Curtain… vs. the small problems that inevitably occur between individuals.

Which would you rather have?

Most of us manage pretty well without being managed.

If you’re married, probably no one forced you. No laws required it. You and your spouse agreed to it. Made a commitment, together. Consent was actually asked – and freely given.

You chose the place where you wanted to live, bought the house you liked from other people who built it without anyone holding a gun to their head (setting aside the codes and other at-gunpoint dictates of the government; the thing itself was done freely).

You decided to have children – or not.

You do not need government to coercively organize and manage and mediate your social circle, either. You have friends because you – and they – want (and choose) to be friends. It happens organically. As would – and could – other social and economic interactions.

You choose your line of work, you elect to go for a walk, pursue this interest or that hobby. Whether you’ll own a car or learn to fly an airplane or take the bus.

A million different things.Harry Brown

But these choices are individual and personal and so variable. They are not predictable by a central authority, do not happen in a controlled and ordered fashion.

Collectively.

Everyone marching in step (the Germans had a word for this, gleichschaltung) according to the “plans” of powerful individuals, who see themselves as the managers of society, of the lives of other people. Whose “plans” take precedence over your right to be left out of them.

This is the meaning of government … as distinct from self-government… that is, anarchy.

We rule ourselves, according to the Golden Rule.

Or, we are ruled by others – according to the rules they decree.

Which do you prefer?

Anarchy does not mean the absence of problems. It means the de-collectivization of them. Whatever problems may occur between and among individuals, they are necessarily small-scale. The individual stands a chance.

When the individual is faced with government, he stands no chance. The outcome is preordained, in favor of the government.

You and your neighbor have a disagreement. He may be a jerk – but it’s just him and so you (and other neighbors) have a reasonable chance of working things out satisfactorily. But what happens when your jerk neighbor has an army (and “the law”) backing him up?what they teach

You have no real choice but to back down. To submit and obey.

This is the order admired by people who get their backs up when anarchy is mentioned. They want you to do as ordered.

As they order.

They abhor discretion, individual judgment. The very idea of a free man, as that was once understood, absolutely appalls them. They view themselves as masters – and to be a master, there must be slaves. The degree of bondage isn’t the relevant consideration. A “house slave” was no less a slave than a “field slave.” Neither was free. Both were owned.

And so are we.

The fact that most of us own cars, a house, have some discretion as to the type of car (and house) and the “spending money” we’re allowed to use – according to certain conditions – in no way changes the fundamental fact that we are owned because we are controlled.

Because we are governed.

And that is why “anarchy” must never be carefully examined.

People might get ideas.

The wrong ones… from a certain point-of-view.

25
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
harry p
harry p

Great write-up, too bad much of the trumpeteers on here are gonna have forum tantrums about it…

bb

No gods , no masters. Stop right there.

Humans have got to worship something. Even so called atheist worship something. Usually themselves or so called science. Like The lie of evolution .

Humans will always have masters , rulers or kings. The real biblical God ordered it this way so there is no escaping masters.God is your master , nature is your master and other people usually end up as your leaders .( masters )Sorry , but that’s just the way it is.Kinda of like the biblical principle of sowing and reaping.

bb

Harry ,you should stick to gun rights and getting rid of all that extra weight you were complaining about.

starfcker
starfcker

Glad you like the golden rule, eric. Wonder where that came from.

flash
flash

Anarchy will never work due the inherent nature of man to organize and employ the collective to strip the weak individual of property and rights. There has ever been only one race of people that understood and enforced English Rule of Law and God-given natural law upon which it is based.

Respect for natural law may even be encoded in certain DNA, not shared with all races as is often evidenced by the lawlessness of many third world nations.

Anarchy is a nice fantasy for those of us who are naturally inclined to self-imposed morality , discipline and long term preferences absolutely necessary for law and order. But, for many others, it is permission to live out their darkest of fantasies unencumbered by morality , law or threat of prosecution.

“Goodness, armed with power, is corrupted; and pure love without power is destroyed.”
― Reinhold Niebuhr

MuckAbout

@flash: Bravo! Except that “God-given natural law ” can just be “natural law” and we can get one other controversial element out of it. Other than that; perfect!

MA

Anonymous
Anonymous

No one ever seems to point to a society from history that has had no government and how successful it was to support Anarchism.

Wonder why?

javelin
javelin

I read it–your points are well expressed if VERY simplified. The big elephant in the room is that people have NEVER shown themselves to be able to revert to barbarism or strive for power over others.
Nature hates a vacuum and void–when there is an absence of rules, laws or even simple collective mindset for a greater good ( imagine the Hoover Dam being built by an anarchist society-even the utopian one you describe.) then civilization stagnates at best but most likely regresses.

Your argument appears to be about human nature and man’s ability to self govern ( which I have fr less faith in tan you)..bt the you try and transpose those personal behaviors to a societal or even global level–would never happen. Groups form–the stronger groups would oppress or victimize the lesser groups. Beliefs of one group would be forced upon others and before you know it–voila! leaders are established and govt exists..would happen every time.

javelin
javelin

Should say–people have never been able to NOT revert…..

Anonymous
Anonymous

javelin.

Your point is supported by the results of a simple police pull back to reduce interaction with the people after the Ferguson riots.

Primitive people result to violence and thuggery instantly, and decent law abiding people become primitive shortly thereafter.

Hollywood Rob

Not true folks. Mans prehistory is almost entirely made up of anarchistic societies that lasted for thousands of years. It is only the introduction of government in the form of kings and then nation states that lead to rise and fall societies. So one might contend that the failed experiment is clearly in the failure of centralized control. It is great for empire building – but maybe that’s not so good for people like you and me.

Suzanna
Suzanna

Eric Peters,

That was lovely. Fantastical, but truly lovely.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Rob,

Show me.

But I’ll show you that they actually had a tribal system of government if you try. They engaged in organized activities and had leaders making rules for them.

Even monkeys, apes and chickens have leaders and a leadership order to their social structure, usually based on the strongest, most aggressive and most powerful being the ones running things (where do you think the phrase “ruling the roost” comes from?).

All social animals have a ruling hierarchy, a government, because they are social animals and can’t exist without one.

As Aristotle observed so long ago “Man is by nature a social animal; an individual who is unsocial naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more than human. Society is something that precedes the individual. Anyone who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not to need to, and therefore does not partake of society, is either a beast or a god. ”

flash
flash

MA , if it were so, but it’s not. If not for the influence of church ( Stephen Langton , in particular) , there would be no English rule of law (Magna Carta) and thus no US Constitution created on the foundation thereof. So regardless, the rule of law which we’ve prospered under and enjoyed these last 8 centuries was inspired and arose from the church’s understanding of God given-natural law. Could it have been otherwise? I think not.

robert h siddell jr
robert h siddell jr

bb: “Even so called atheist worship something. Usually themselves or so called science. Like The lie of evolution” When Evolutionist make arguments that negate God, they usually sound like 1st graders explaining Relativity. But I dare say on the other hand, probably everything made of matter evolves.

Bea Lever
Bea Lever

The reason tribes of indigenous people have been sought out and killed or enslaved by our overlords was in great part to destroy any proof that people have been successful in self-government and existing quite nicely WITHOUT all powerful organized government.

ottomatik
ottomatik

Casual observation reveals life, all life, is competition for finite resources. In this context Anarchy is fanciful. Larger, and especially, more specialized groups, demonstrate greater resource dominance. At some point you have to be in a group large enough(or specialized enough) to prevent other groups from taking your resources.
It’s not that Anarchy falls down due to the ridiculous notion that we are amoral without governmental instruction, as the Author points out correctly, were all just fine. Its that without the governments instruction we cannot organize in to large or specialized enough groups to defend our resources.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Bea,

Most of those tribes -and a tribe has a government usually the Chief and tribal elders sometimes the Chief and his warriors- usually just killed or expelled dissenters unless they were powerful and popular enough to take over tribal governments.

That “noble savage” crap is just that: Crap.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote

Our dick of a boss was a little Mussolini. We got so used to it that when I changed jobs, I was shocked to have so many decisions to make on my own. The freedom to do things formerly proscribed was troubling.

Prof Pangloss said that (house) work expands to fill the time available. Emotions and the state of our psyche expand and contract as well. I will have to think about that for a bit, but for now, what I mean is that one can feel totally free with the freedom to choose when to go to the bathroom or feel fettered when made to wait 2 minutes at a fast food joint.

Capn Mike
Capn Mike

Hey people! Almost every comment whines about how “fanciful” the concept of anarchy is. “Oh, a leader will evolve and we’re back at tyranny” etc.

Deal with THIS: Anarchy is a political ideal. It will NEVER be perfect. Not like Socialism which is so perfect as we all know. /sarc.

So let’s approach the ideal rather than run to the State.

It’s about GOALS.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote

Given a choice between anarchy or bust, I’ll take the double d’s. Palin preferably.

Araven
Araven

The primary people who benefit from government are the smart psychopaths. For many years there have been psychopaths who wanted wealth and power who were smart enough to manipulate the rest of the people into forming large governments with the lie that the government was to protect the people from the psychopaths who would manipulate and steal from them when in fact the governments were organized by the psychopaths TO manipulate and steal from them. These psychopaths now control a world-wide collection of governments and there will always be a small percentage of the population who are smart psychopaths more than willing to replace those now in power. These governments are way too powerful and have indoctrinated the sheeple to the point where true anarchy is impossible.

ottomatik
ottomatik

Uh-huh, fanciful, especially, if your talking about instituting it as a political ideology. Good luck, whatever little outpost of Anarchy the Anarchist manage to institute, will be overrun and consumed by hordes of adjacent socialist in need of resources to redistribute.
Maybe a small secluded island or and abandoned oil rig.

iconoclast421
iconoclast421

Anarchy requires a society with an average IQ of >100, or it requires low population and / or isolation between clans.

Slayer of Sacred Cows
Slayer of Sacred Cows

The primary role of government is to provide services – infrastructure, defense, etc. People only worship government because they’ve been indoctrinated to believe so. As technology decentralizes, new free-market services will replace government services – look at the blockchain and bitcoin in particular – and the worship of government will fade as the need for government fades. Anarchism does not require a high-IQ or educated population to remain stable (it’s actuall authoritarian systems that require an educated populace), anarchism merely needs to provide the services that people need. Anarchism is inevitable.

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading