The Case for Anarchy

WHAT IS ANARCHY?

It is said that he who controls the narrative controls the people. This adage is aptly slapped on the term "anarchy", as the media and government (one and the same?) attempt to control the populace by controlling the meaning of words. Every time a group riots or someone engages in mass violence, the news stories and reports march lock-step in proclaiming the event to be "anarchy". The recent "revolution" at the Capitol is a case in point. Fifty cents for every time anarchy was used in a story surrounding this would be a nifty retirement fund. So...What IS anarchy?

The word derives from the Medieval Latin "anarchia", which comes from the Greek "anarkia" - "lack of a leader, the state of a people without a government". An - "without", arkos - "leader". Nothing about rioting, destruction, killing, etc. Most anarchists would consider the initiation of violence against another to be the most intolerable of acts.

VOLUNTARYISM AND AGORISM

Ceding, for a moment, the imposed perception and emotional attachment to the term "anarchy"; I will move to the ideologies most associated and aligned with anarchists. Those in the Voluntaryist and Agorist communities can find little of merit to disagree upon between themselves...or with the Anarchist. Whatever differences may arise are generally over issues of implementation, with the usual consensus that individuals are best suited to choose their own circumstances voluntarily.

So, let's look at the definitions of these terms...

Anarchism - a political theory holding ALL forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on VOLUNTARY cooperation and free association of individuals and groups. (I know, "scary").

Voluntaryism - the ideal that relations among people should be VOLUNTARY and by mutual consent. Voluntaryism does not argue for the specific form that voluntary arrangements will take; only that force be abandoned so that individuals in society may flourish. (Oooh, so frightening).

Agorism - Emphasizes the importance of VOLUNTARY non-violent, direct actions to undermine the State and build a society based on the principles of unrestricted VOLUNTARY exchange. (I peed myself a little...;)

So, with all this peaceful and voluntary interaction...where does the violence and force spring from?

THE GOVERNMENT AS AN AGENT OF VIOLENCE

If I were to point to your local bakery, you could easily tell me what they made there. The same could be said for most entities. Government, too, has a product. That product is "violence".

While most think of the acts of the military when mention is made of government violence, it is every encounter with government that comes with the unspoken understanding that if you do not comply with their demands, violence of some sort will ensue.

Violence is never a means to knowledge. As Isabel Paterson, explained in her book, The God of the Machine, "No edict of law can impart to an individual a faculty denied him by nature. A government order cannot mend a broken leg, but it can command the mutilation of a sound body. It cannot bestow intelligence, but it can forbid the use of intelligence." To advocate any form of invasive violence is logically precarious. Coercion is not an argument. William Godwin pointed out that force "is contrary to the nature of the intellect, which cannot but be improved by conviction and persuasion," and "if he who employs coercion against me could mold me to his purposes by argument, no doubt, he would.. He pretends to punish me because his argument is strong; but he really punishes me because he is weak." Violence contains none of the energies that enhance a civilized human society. At best, it is only capable of expanding the material existence of a few individuals, while narrowing the opportunities of most others.

THE NATURAL STATE

People engage in voluntary and unprovoked exchanges every day in order to improve their circumstances. No entity is capable of assigning value to the article they wish to exchange, other than themselves. No entity can identify the worth of whatever they wish to obtains, except the one holding it. The exchange requires the mutual acceptance of BOTH parties in order to be conducted. Without legislative interference, voluntaryism naturally occurs.

The implementation of even the minutest of legislative process creates an unfair and dishonest circumstance for one of the stakeholders in the above exchange. The very reason for such legislation...to use collective force to provide benefit for one at the expense of another...in inherent in every "law" from those against speeding to the multitude of licensing agencies in the centralized control model.

A FINAL QUESTION

Do you need to be "governed"?