The Benefits of an Anarchist Society - An Examination of an Often Misused Term and Misunderstood Concept
The concept and term “anarchy” often brings forth visions of chaos and riots in the street - but in reality, this is actually “Anomy” (or “Anomie”) a term originally coined by sociologist Emile Durkheim with means a loss of societal order, characterised by looting, violence and the breakdown of any structure, as well as increased suicide rates [1]. In contrast, the political concept of “Anarchy”, expanded on by Russian Revolutionary and founder of collectivist anarchism Mikhail Bakunin, simply means “the absence of rulership” [2]. Let’s examine this concept in a bit more detail.
London Greenpeace actually advocates for an anarchist society, which it states means “a society without exploitation, oppression and hierarchy, based on strong and free communities, the sharing of precious resources and respect for all life” [3]. In other words, as opposed to “Anomie”, anarchism (hitherto discussed without quotation marks) refers to a social order, and a system or self-organisation, and thus is pretty much the opposite of chaos. In sharp contrast to existing political systems, however, an anarchic society is based on volunteering and the co-responsibility of each individual. It is by no means about the absence of structure (otherwise only goods that can be produced independently would be available) or rules of conduct, but with the absence of external domination [4]. The incontestability of the individual’s personal freedom, and thus, as a compelling, deepest principle also the respect for everybody else’s personal freedom are the mainstays of this worldview [5].
In order to function, this concept relies on self-responsibility, cooperation, consensus and reason. The requirement goes beyond merely acting like adults and involves generosity in thinking, a complex understanding that the well-being of the group corresponds to one’s own well-being - the obligatory civil or even military service as well as compulsory taxes and dues are unknown to anarchy [6]. It does not prohibit anything that does not harm others, and manages to do so with a minimum of rules (self-determined by each community) - more important than laws that are worked out to the last detail (and then circumvented) is the spirit of respect for one another [6]. It is possibly unnecessary to emphasise that as states of the world, as societies, and (with a few exceptions) as individuals, we are far from being able to handle such freedoms [7].
The ideal is that anarchy (in spite of all cynicism) would at some point be the natural, peaceful consequence of being supported, positively challenged and loved from childhood on if cooperation was the maxim instead of competition and greed. Unlike people living today, who have learned from an early age that all others are competitors and potential enemies, it would be easier for people raised in the spirit of anarchy to act altruistically and trust their fellow human beings to do likewise - the basic requirement for this social model [8]. Anarchism has also inspired some interesting commentary regarding science, referred to as epistemological anarchism, but maybe that is a concept for another post [9].
So, how did anarchism get such a bad rap? Mostly because the definition has been skewed to keep so-called “radical” notions out of the mainstream media. The public is only exposed to anarchism when some of its advocates use confrontational tactics via mass protests, which sometimes include smashing the windows of banks and other corporate outlets, blockading political and economic summits, and, in some instances, fighting police in the streets [10]. Such individuals believe that a dramatic change in political systems cannot be achieved without violence, and use their misunderstood version of anarchism (which we have already stated are actually supporting “anomie”, not “anarchy”) to support their worldview. This is not a new concept, as is also supported by some advocates of Communism (hello Chinese and Russian revolutions), but are not necessarily what that political concept is all about, and only supports some exponents who have taken the ideology and expanded upon it for their own personal benefit [11]. Such is also the case with anarchism [12].
Although a world without deprivation would still have crime, due to the pleasure that the forbidden holds for some humans, but the overwhelming majority of crimes, namely, those committed as a result of destitution and abuse passed on for generations, would be eliminated [13]. Furthermore, due to dramatic increases in the world’s population, anarchism world most likely only work in a vacuum of small, collective groups, for, although our desire for fellowship goes deep down into our genes, this propensity has evolved under circumstances that no longer exist today. We used to know all members of our tribe. If we did something for the benefit of everyone, we were rewarded with respect and gratitude and, conversely, could not afford endless misconduct without being shunned or held accountable [14] [15]. This regulation suddenly falls away as our groups grow larger than about 150 people (also called Dunbar’s number), and in its place abstract concern for the common good would have to take over, which is why for this concept to work, large groups would have to be broken down into smaller collectives [16]. It is important for humanity to familiarise themselves with somewhat falsely maligned concepts that are admonished for political and consumerist gain, and unfortunately anarchism is one such ideology. Hopefully this post will help others who are not familiar with this concept to reconsider its benefits for society as a whole, especially in light of the failures and harmful effects of existing capitalist democracies which reign supreme, especially in the Western world. References
[1] https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195396607/obo-9780195396607-0006.xml.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakunin. [3] http://www.mcspotlight.org/beyond/companies/bodyshop.html.
[4] http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/kropotkin/britanniaanarchy.html.
[5] https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1976/04/01/freedom-and-anarchy/.
[6] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/bob-black-anarchy-101.
[7] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/08/06/peter-t-leeson/anarchy-unbound-or-why-self-governance-works-better-you-think.
[8] https://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/anarchy-in-the-hive/11009402.
[9] https://www.ukessays.com/essays/philosophy/feyerabend-and-epistemological-anarchism-analysis-philosophy-essay.php.
[10] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anarchism/.
[11] https://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/docs/vision_of_communism.php.
[12] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/scott-of-the-insurgency-culture-collective-the-anarchist-response-to-crime.
[13] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/07/anarchism
[14] https://newint.org/features/2011/06/01/anarchism-explained.
[15] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/14/selfish-proof-ego-humans-inherently-good.
[16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number.
