The concept of anarchy is widely misunderstood by the masses of society; people are afraid to explore its philosophical roots and foundational structures. Anarchism isn’t a one-sided concept; this concept can be measured on a scale using individual preferences for the anarchical perspective. The educational institutions around America will teach the philosophies & concepts of conservatism, liberalism, communism, socialism, capitalism, libertarianism, democracy, republicanism, but never anarchism. The idea of anarchy fears most because most people never imagined a life without a leading hand pointing them to the door. Even the infamous Jean-Jacques Rousseau said, “Man is born free, but he is in chains everywhere.”
Before the mid 19th century, such an idea was unspoken, but the father of anarchy, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, gave life to this groundbreaking concept. In the words of Proudhon, “To be governed is to be watched over, inspected, spied on, directed, legislated at, regulated, docketed, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, assessed, weighed, censored, ordered about, by men who have neither the right, nor the knowledge, nor the virtue.” Democracy has ruined many societies, yet it’s the primary system of government that appeals to the mass populations across the world, especially in the United States of America. A democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. With that being said, is democracy truly the way to mobilize societies? The concept of democracy and its effectiveness is arguable, but there’s an objective truth to the oppressive nature of democracy.
Democracy will always establish an element of division in a society as long as it exists. Democracy subjugates the minority to the majority, and we see this every four years in the United States of America when presidential elections occur. Democracy laws are created by the voting majority while leaving the rights and voices of the minority on the back burner until the next election season. Unfortunately, under democracy, this never-ending cycle of political ebbing and flowing will never end. The same thing can be said about a republic, which allows laws to be formulated by political representatives chosen by the people of a society. Excuse me if I hold a cynical perspective about politicians and other elected officials, but the results of our unorganized and history-rich political climate say otherwise. Politicians don’t work for people; they work for elites; they all do. How do you think they get their campaign donations, endorsements, and endless benefits? It isn’t because they genuinely care; the truth is ordinary people don’t hold power to puppet string politicians like corporations and interest groups do. And yes, few politicians keep their word, but their efforts can only go so far when going against an entire system full of corruption and power-hungry elites. Do people ever get tired of the democrat, republican, democrat, republican, democrat, republican repeat?
America’s political system reminds me of the Rick Astley “Never Gonna Give You Up” prank because you never know what you will get. Depending on politicians to accomplish things is just people waiting to be Rickrolled. America’s founding fathers made it vividly clear why political parties should not be created, but political society didn’t listen, and now the country is in a never-ending cycle of playground politics. Political parties will be the destruction of America; this nation will fall as long as we continue to conform to divisive politics. There’s no way people think a country could survive if the citizens within are amid ideological and political warfare with each other.
We live in a society where people go to prison for smoking marijuana, possessing “illegal” firearms, not paying taxes, and selling products or operating a business without the “helping” hand of the government. Government overall will contribute to the destruction of society. Imagine a government telling you that you can’t protect yourself without their regulation and validation. Imagine a government regulating the type of plants you grow in your backyard. Imagine a government telling you how much you should pay in taxes so politicians can get lifetime salaries. People often fear chaos under anarchy, but chaos is something built into human nature. Even with the government, society will always experience chaos. Criminals running rampant is the first thing anti-anarchists are concerned about, which is ironic because the same government they support is the same government that creates criminals.
For example, gun control is a prime example of how the government makes criminals out of innocent people. There’s a duality to humanity; some may call it good vs. bad, black vs. white, true vs. false, moral vs. immoral, the point being that there’s always going to be a diverse but unique mix of people embedded within human societies. Everyone isn’t going to be the same; societies will always see a difference in action amongst different people. And unfortunately, some individuals are blind to boundaries, so why take away an individual’s right to protect themselves against those that infringe on their natural rights? Law-abiding citizens are forced to engage in illicit behavior by illegally buying guns through black markets to protect themselves. How else will people protect themselves against people with no boundaries if the government won’t do it? This same logic can be applied to marijuana/drugs. When the government criminalizes the usage of marijuana and other drugs, it does nothing but force law-abiding citizens to purchase these goods through “illegal” portals. At this point, it’s safe to claim that humanity is being shackled by the chains of mass government control. The government says it’s illegal to murder, yet they “legally” do it to individuals facing the death penalty. Who gave the government special exemptions from the same laws they created for citizens to abide by?
Are governments not required to follow those laws too? Oh, wait! I forgot that this is the same government that gives police officers special exemptions and immunities, which can protect them from facing punishment, even after committing egregious acts against citizens? The government has the nerve to check citizens about the debt they acquired but never find the time to review, discuss, or check the trillions of dollars of debt they earned.
It’s the audacity for me!
As much as I would like to think the US constitution protects individual rights for citizens, the government always finds ways to surpass those written laws. Yes, the first amendment protects the freedom of speech, but it doesn’t seem to protect those with opposing views, which is why we see this new censorship and cancel culture spreading like wildfires. Did we not learn from America’s 28th President Woodrow Wilson? He was the same one who oppressed Americans by strongly enforcing the espionage and sedition act. Woodrow Wilson made an effort to silence America, and he did it all with the power & helping hand of a democratic government. Yes, the second amendment matters until the “wrong” person bear a firearm. And yes, the third amendment matters until the government decides they need to enter your home regardless of what the amendment says. There is no such thing as a written law protecting people, especially when we already have natural rights. Why do we need a government to validate and regulate the rights of people?
I would argue that individuals are not true anarchists if they require law enforcement and government to control their actions. A true anarchist knows boundaries without the presence of law. Anarchists advocate for the absence of government because they acknowledge how the government continues to cross boundaries that should not be crossed. Everyone should enjoy their natural rights. And if an individual’s rights infringe on others’ freedom, that’s not a right; it’s an infringement, nothing more to it. All people are entitled to protect themselves against tyranny and infringement, and anarchy reserves the protection of these natural rights. I don’t believe society is yet prepared to live under certain circumstances due to mass misunderstanding, but it’s important to have these sorts of intellectual dialogues and debates, it’s how we move forward. These are the kind of discussions we must have as a society. We first must start with challenging the status quo; that’s how society will form a common ground amongst the masses.