I admittedly struggle with the concept of anarchy, but I don't feel as though it comes from a place of arrogance (people who are anarchists are "childish or immature") but rather distrust in people themselves.
I think that's why I have been such a hard sell until late on Libertarianism in general, seeing as though so much of it is based on personal responsibility, which I am all for because I can be personally responsible.
Yet, so many people can't.
I suppose, if you are coming at anarchy from the perspective that people can properly govern themselves, color me skeptical about that reality. Though I have come to learn that there are many interpretations of what an anarchist society might look like.
I guess I haven't found one that looks anywhere near probable yet!
Fantastic read though! :)
I can totally sympathize with distrusting a lot of people. The question is, in a world of imperfect, flawed, sometimes malicious people, does it improve the situation to give SOME of those imperfect, flawed, and sometimes malicious people POWER over the rest of us? (And is it not the nastiest people who usually end up in those positions?)
That's a very thought provoking point. And to be honest, I don't know. I don't think that all leaders are terrible, or all police. I think there is a healthy mix. I was in the middle of training to be a cop, and injury took me out, but I saw a variety of people there for a variety of reasons. We could definitely use a few less meatheads who were just there to fuck some shit up.
I have experienced the same in politics. I was with the Republican party as a Precinct Committeeman for quite some time, and in my experience, there was also a variety of people and reasons for those people to be serving.
I think we tend to see the worst in those people because it is put on display. I think that a lot could change if we fixed the government rather than completely demolishing it. I think one of the biggest problems is corporate government, and businesses being in bed with politicians.
I am usually very anti-regulation, but I think that regulation and oversight is 100% necessary on those making decisions about our money and our rights and that highly regulating the interactions between government and business would solve a lot of problems right off the bat. Though, it is likely it will never happen, and I can see the advantages of just trashing it all and starting anew.
It's a very complicated and delicate situation.
Oversight by who? De-centralize and be responsible for your own money and the decisions you make with it...
Why try to reinvent the wheel though? To a degree, that's what anarchy is. Eventually, people will have to come together and reorganize again. Discover that it's not efficient to do everything yourself, or any better to privatize everything for profit. We have seen what doing that with jails has done. So ultimately, we all decentralize, then rediscover each other on a community level and reconstruct society to the point that it looks identical in 100 years. I just don't understand it when it would be so much easier to just fix the things that are egregiously wrong.
"Government" is not just cooperation and/or organization; it is violent domination. The only difference between voluntaryism and statism is that voluntaryists don't pretend that "authority" is real, or that anyone has an exemption from morality. There are literally millions of ways to organize and work together on a VOLUNTARY basis. What is "egregiously wrong" is the notion that violently dominating people is okay if it's called "law" and done in the name of the "common good." In fact, that has been the cause of the vast majority of injustice and human suffering in history.
It can also be looked at this way: If you look at children, they learn best by practical tasks and observations, in other words, learning by trial and error. And thats the basics of science. And as sutch what most are missing is htat to succeed you wil fail x number of times first. But if you never even try, then you wil never learn and thus succeed.
MEaning if people never take responsability for theyre actions, and insted depend on hte architypal parrants (gouvernment or and archon) they wil never learn to take care of themselves and be responsable for theyre actions.
If you do something bad, life smacks you in the face, if you do something good, life rewards you. But When it comes to archons/"rulers", they bypass that by having obediant followers do theyre bad stuff. So the obediant masses gets smacked in the face insted of the archons/"rulers".
Point is, we need to venture out in the chaos of darkness, to light the candles (yes refrensing candles in the dark ;) ) That includes doing stuff we dont yet know how to do, like taking responsability.