Let us think about anarchism, anger and anti-statism. Most people’s view of anarchism is that it is an angry, impassioned plea for governments to be disbanded or overthrown. It has no plan and has not thought the consequences through.

If brought up among the average group of intelligent people at the top of any profession, anarchism is dismissed as nothing more than an overly idealistic political philosophy among youths. Indeed, many people are only interested in anarchism during their youth, and later “realize” the state is necessary once they are paying their taxes etc.

However, most people don’t realize how many influential and dominant intellectuals in fact favor anarchism. The tendency to dismiss anarchists as an angry, passionate lot who have not thought through the consequences of their zero state goal is an example of the political habit of assuming the speaker either has all the solutions or has none. Not for a moment do people realize that in fact no-one has all the solutions to society’s problems, although some theories and philosophies can be of great aid. I tend to use the term anti-statism rather than anarchism, because many interpretations of anarchism are about all authority being disbanded. That would be an impossibility, since even the people who first thought through such a goal and proposed it were themselves natural authorities in their field of interest. The most credible type of anarchism, the type preached by their best today, is merely criticism of the modern state and corporate hierarchies. There’s no proposition there that all forms of organization and authority are evil, just a yearning for more organic and less paradoxical forms of organization and authority.

More from Beliefnet and our partners
previous posts

Americans are overwhelmingly polarized over ongoing presidential election campaigns. The choice is going to be between Donald Trump – an oligarch accused of disregarding the interests of minorities, and Hillary Clinton – an utterly disgraced public servant too unqualified and incompetent to even serve at the lowest possible grade in the US State Department. But, between the two, one has already clearly […]

Whatever you may think of it, everyone – politicians most of all – must respect the Brexit vote. The British people are not a bunch of children who need to be stood in the corner by know-it-all politicians because they voted “wrong”. They have voted, albeit by a slim margin, to no longer be part of the European Union. As far […]

In my experience (oh the irony…), there is a battle of experience vs knowledge. As someone who studied International Relations at university, but has little to no political experience or travel history abroad, I may seem like someone right out of an ivory tower. This would be a good ad hominem against me in a […]

Immanuel Wallerstein asserted in a recent post that the gap between American power and political rhetoric is growing. This can be related to the the Syrian problem at the heart of current US foreign policy. The US is no longer the dominant power in the world. However, it refuses to accept this, International Relations expert Wallerstein wrote at the start of June. […]

Close Ad