Anarchism - the theory that all forms of government interfere unjustly with individual liberty and should be replaced by the voluntary association of cooperative groups (Webster's New World Dictionary).
Recently some persons that shall remain nameless (though you know who you are) poked some good-natured fun at my preference for Anarchy. They used the term anarchy as a synonym for violent chaos which as one can see from further exploration in Webster's that this is a popular connotation for the word but the word anarchy at its root merely means the absence of government and law and not necessarily the absence of good social order. The world can "suffer" peace without having any interference from benevolent government officials and at times can become even the more violent because of government intervention into simple neighborly disputes that could have otherwise been worked out by the individuals involved.
Most of us live our everyday lives in a state of anarchy. Those of us who carry concealed handguns walk amongst an unsuspecting population with the capability of causing the death of a large number of people. That we do not go berserk and shoot up some rude salesclerk has more to do with our personal moral code (or the fact that the target might also be armed) than it does that it is against the law to do so. Most recent mass murders by lone crazed gunmen have such a high number of victims because the government decreed that the victims should be disarmed and incapable of defending themselves. The laws against murder never stopped anyone bent on committing it.
The first question that people ask of proponents of anarchism is if there is no government, who will take care of [insert "essential" government-provided service here]? This is one of those questions that is best answered by asking another question. Who is in charge of making sure that your local grocery store has the products that you want on hand when you show up to shop there? Who is in charge of making sure that some young person wants to go to medical school so that years later there is a doctor in the Emergency Room when you have need of one? Who was in charge of making sure the house you live in was built in the first place?
All these services are provided by private individuals who have decided to serve you in order to make their living. If they fail at providing the service you want at the quality you demand, then you fire them by no longer doing business with them until they improve. You can't expect this much from any service the government provides since you generally have no power to fire them and the government always gets its fee from you in the form of taxes. The government can also pass laws that gives it the monopoly over some industries and businesses, including the business of passing laws, with no concern for keeping you, the customer, satisfied. Just compare at how things work at Fed-Ex and UPS over the quality of service provided by the U.S. Postal Service, which has a monopoly over handling the mail because the Federal government says so.
In the last few years, people who believe as I do have been given a bad reputation mostly from a group of individuals who are self-described and also labeled by the government as anarchists. Now these folks do want to overthrow a government by violent means but then they want to replace it with one of their own that abolishes private property rights and is usually of Marxist leaning. It would be more correct to call these people, "Communist Revolutionaries." It is ironic that when their homes are raided by police officers holding search warrants, they complain of their property-rights not being respected.
As George Washington said, "Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." As some people would strive to eliminate all weapons so that man, supposedly, could not harm himself or his fellow man, I strive to eliminate government which has proved itself to be the most deadly weapon ever devised. But I'm an easily contented man (some might call me lazy but that's only because they are not as easily contented as I am) and I accept just about any degree of shrinkage when it comes to Leviathan. If you work with me in this endeavor, even if you believe in limited government, then we have more to unite us than to separate us...
* For further reading, I would like to recommend Market Anarchy Explained: "But Who Will Build The Roads?" by Francois Tremblay.
Whenever someone says, "there ought to be a law..." what they mean (even if they don't know it) is that whatever action it is they want to abolish (or mandate) should be confronted by the use of violence.
ReplyDeleteWear your seatbelt OR ELSE. (If you object, and the guy demanding you use it has a badge and a gun, and you meet force with force, you will be SHOT and MURDERED over not wearing a seatbelt.)
I prefer Leonard Read's view on this, encapsulated by his essay, "Anything That's Peaceful," and harbor naught but disgust for those who think order stems from the threat of police/state violence.
In the aftermath of the Newtown shooting, apparently cowards believe that motivated gun owners who "cling to their guns" should be executed.
Have you ever also noticed that when people say, "there ought to be a law," what they sometimes mean is that "others" need to have their butts kicked for engaging in certain activities not approved of by the whining party? By calling for a law, they're calling for the bullies of the government to do the butt-kicking for them.
DeleteThis shows them to be cowards since they don't have the gumption to do the butt-kicking themselves...
You anarchists oversimplify. "simple neighborly disputes that could have otherwise been worked out by the individuals involved". Really? Worked out by whom? Enforced by whom?
ReplyDeleteWhat you get is enforced by the strong over the weak. Want to be ruled by the local war/drug lord? Try anarchy.
The naivete of anarchists truly amazes me. George Bernard Shaw was totally taken in by the one world fascists, but he did make an accidentally astute observation, to wit. "The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it."
I have yet to see a 'grass is greener' anarchist who is not naive beyond belief.
"Worked out by whom? Enforced by whom?"
DeleteQuote me and then ask a question when the answer is within the quote? Huh?
Strong over the weak? Isn't that what government is?
Government, in the original American version, before being purchased by City of London banking interests, was to be a system of laws giving the common man rights and standing before the law equal with the largest elite financial interests. Eventually, as history records, Jefferson lost and Hamilton, and the Rothschilds behind him, won.
DeleteThe American experiment of government was founded to be the common agreement of the weak, binding together to oppose the tyranny of the outlaws, most notably the elite. That this government has been co opted, or more precisely, purchased, by the elite is not the fault of properly limited government, but of the people's failure to participate in it.
Want to live in a day to day hell of the strong ruling the powerless? Try real anarchy. That's what you'll get. In real anarchy, money power will purchase whatever means necessary to maintain their parasite position. Eliminating government will not change that.
I recommend you take the theorists with a grain of salt. They proffer imaginations not born in actual experience to twits gullible enough to believe any argument that seems logical.
Study history. It just happens to be the record of how things actually work.
"Want to live in a day to day hell of the strong ruling the powerless?"
DeleteThat's what we live in now. I've studied, and lived through, a good deal of history so I have a good idea how this all ends. I am not the gullible but the creator of my own theory.
I have been a "hired gun" of the elite and I know how the system - government - works in the nitty-gritty. Disarm the elite by removing their top and most powerful weapon - involuntary government - and they will end up in the trash bin of history...
"local war/drug lord" is just a crude rudimentary government, that anarchists neither would tolerate. People are kowtowing else the war/drug lord would just be a local thug. Thugs can be and should be stood down. The people who are naive are those who believe there CAN be a utopia if only somebody else would do something about their troubles. Life is a struggle, it is competitive, get used to it. Those who aggravate with violence make it worse and those who submit to it are no help whatsoever.
ReplyDelete@ Grey GhostJanuary 22, 2013 at 9:00 AM
ReplyDelete"Disarm the elite by removing their top and most powerful weapon - involuntary government - and they will end up in the trash bin of history..."
Once you remove involuntary government, of course, the elite will cease all efforts to dominate? Dude, ease up on the chronic because that's a pipe dream of the first order.
I should have been more specific. The current bunch will be made to go away (nature does follow its course) but, like the poor, we will always have criminals amongst us. And criminals always take the course of least resistance and the most popular one of those is to implement an involuntary form of government upon the people.
DeleteYou know; criminals like you...
"The current bunch will be made to go away"
DeleteAnd who is going to make them go away? A bunch of disorganized cats like libertarians? Are you kidding?
If lovers of freedom are going to keep the criminals off their backs, there is only one way to do it. You have to be stronger than they are. The only way to do that is to band together and pool resources greater than the elite has. That was what Jefferson was trying to do. The problem is he had to compromise with the representatives of the elite to do it. They, of course, ran off with all the power. The lesson is, you can not compromise with enemies. The other lesson is that libertarians are dreaming great pipe dreams that they can just opt out of the new world order and still be left with their property. It seems a pretty high price for being historically illiterate.
"And who is going to make them go away?"
DeleteAgain the answer was in my prose. Somehow your ability to read is stunted in some fashion. Your "superiority complex" is beginning to test the elasticity of my patience of dealing with another person who cannot be confused with facts because his mind is already made up.
You consider your own political theory to be the absolute truth and you readily dismiss all others as tripe contrived by mental incompetents based on their delusional worldview of reality, missing the point that they might be working from a higher moral code than your own.
Your postings here and at the Daily Bell do not build a team of like-minded individuals but due to your excessive use of derision, ridicule, and belittlement you only create more division and dissension.
You rail against the Elite calling for more use of their number one tool to oppress the masses. Your argument against them is less as opponents to a peaceful way of life and more as rivals seated on a throne that you would prefer your own posterior rested upon. You have more in common with Hamilton than you do with Jefferson.
You may continue to post here if you feel so compelled, but believe me, it will only be an unnecessary waste of digital ink...