The term Anarchy has been used since the French Revolution to describe a society with no government. This is the most basic definition of Anarchy. The word, however, is much misunderstood, as most individuals seem to equate it with violence and chaos. Real Anarchists (not the kind you see in movies, but the ones that exist in the real world) are actually opposed to violence and chaos. This, in fact, is where their resistance to the state actually stems from, as they believe that governments are amongst the worst perpetuators of violence, oppression, and chaos in the world.
One specific place that Anarchists often see fault in government is through their oppression of the people they rule over. In fact, the Declaration of Independence of the United States declares that, “…to secure these rights, government are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Anarchists, however, will argue that there is never true consent of the governed. In any form of government there will always be a percentage of the population, no matter how small, that disagrees with the actions of the government, and those individuals will always be oppressed.
Individualist Anarchists also believe in the absolute sovereignty of the individual. This means that every person should have complete and unlimited control over his or her own self. If a person wants to use a drug, they should be allowed to. If a person wants to speak their mind, then they should be allowed to. The individual is king over himself. Anarchists believe that any restraint on this sovereignty is evil, but if a government places that restraint, then it is an absolute evil. This is because governments can act under the veil of legitimacy. This line of thinking leads Anarchists to the conclusion that individualism and the state are utterly irreconcilable.
Anarchists also favor economic freedom meaning that the state should not have any influence in the economy. This is because they see political power and wealth as inseparable. When a government is formed, much of the countries wealth is funneled to the political elite and their direct supporters and influences. Anarchists believe that when there is a state apparatus in place a majority of the people, likely the middle-class and lower-class, are exploited. There is also a minority of people that both exploit and are exploited. There is, however, one class of people that are the rich political elites that do nothing but exploit the rest of the population. The elite status and the wealth were obtained through politics and the government, which therefore makes the state evil in their inherent oppression of the majority of the population.
Anarchists are not inherently violent individuals, despite their reputation, and they do not aim to bring chaos to the world. The end goal of Anarchism is the abolishment of the state, but supporters of the philosophy do not believe that this will lead to chaos. On the contrary, they believe that governments all over the world create violence, oppression, exploitation, and chaos everywhere they are formed. This, according to Anarchists, is achieved through wars, taxes, suppression of personal freedoms, suppression of economic freedoms, and many other immoral acts of the state. Therefore, a society without the influence of governing bodies that have a “legal monopoly over the use force,” as Anarcho-Capitalist Murray Rothbard puts it, could not have a worse outcome than what already exists.
For more information on the subject written by yours truly check out Rational Anarchy: A Brief Definition
“Anarchists are not inherently violent individuals, despite their reputation.”
That reputation is probably the single greatest piece of propaganda, ever disseminated. Contrast even the stereotypical “bombs, beards, backpacks” revolutionary anarchism of a century ago, with the State’s monopoly on violence, and the legal exceptionalism of “it’s not illegal when the Government does it”; the former is *always* a reaction to the latter.
I am an anarchist and I am not fomenting any helter skelter action that needlessly leads to the maiming or injuring of innocent people, or the destruction of innocent people’s property and possessions.
my viewpoint is this: “if you are not going to give us RULE OF LAW and governance by ‘We The People’ instead of ‘We The Oligarchs and the Rich or the Weaspons Vendors’, then it’s time to take this charade down and install a REAL GOVERNMENT FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE..”
if that’s an anarchist’s viewpoint, so be it! We’re tired of our tax money being stolen from us to feed the goddamned Military Industrial Complex, and to murder and destroy legitimate governments around the globe, and to allow asshole, rogue, out of control organizations like ‘AL-CIA-DA’ to blame a ‘database’ for governmental FALSE FLAG MASS MURDER on SEPT 11, 2001. (replay of OPERATION NORTHWOODS).
this has to end. truly it does. If they don’t want to end it peacefully, then we’ll end it bloody and violently, and with the maximum amount of hemp being used to go around the necks of those who took us here to this ruin.
we’ll see if they can stop us. I doubt it.
An extremely cogent and concise definition of true anarchism. Rare to find someone who actually what’s it’s really all about.
there are many strains of anarchism besides individualism, including anarchists who believe that voluntary cooperation is superior to forced competition (often referred to as libertarian socialists).
there are mutualists, syndicalists, egoists, communists, and many others who have put the anti-authoritarian prefix “anarcho-” in front of their ideology of choice. there are even primitivists who eschew modern technology and transhumanists who want to merge humanity with technology.
and with so many flavors, there is a vibrant debate among anarchists as to how the world should be organized – a vibrancy that is sadly lacking in the mainstream world of authoritarian politics.
but what unites all of us is the understanding that the state – which is not just government but also the large corporations and the elite – is the enemy of humanity and a threat to human survival.
as we approach economic “shock and awe” an amazing opportunity awaits us … will anarchists rise to the occasion?
Wanting JUSTICE is not ANARCHY think about this. And understand what you wrote it is politics.
My friend with all due respect you are not an anarchist you may want to be one but what you speaking about is changing one form of an oppressing ruling group(government) to another which eventually will end up be in is evolving stages nothing deferent than the one you just change.
A true anarchist what is not mentioned above has also laws the ones no human ever wrote and are called the un written laws and are base on common sense and good according to the individual situation.
Anarchist also is based on a society that does not revolve around money and ownership that is the start of all enslavement and wars.
THINK ABOUT IT
HardHawk
Even the staunchest free-market economists have unwisely admitted that laws must be created by governmental legislation; this concession provides an inevitable gateway for State tyranny over the individual. The twin of the free-market economy is not a democratic legislature, but a proliferation of voluntary rules interpreted and applied by experts in the law.
http://mises.org/story/3245
Why anarchy? George Wallace said it best, “there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between” Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, Patriot Act, banning books like “America Deceived’ from Amazon, Wikipedia and Facebook, warrant-less wiretapping and opening private mail. They are both guilty of treason.
Clean them all out and save this great nation.
Last link (before Google Books bends to gov’t Will and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000083883
I have one objection to the definition you use for individualist anarchists – “that every person should have complete and unlimited control over his or her own self”.
There is a required caveat: “so long as their actions are consistent with the principle of non-coercion”.
In other words, an individualist anarchist does not assert the right to destroy others’ property if he feels like it.
Apart form that, a reasonably cogent exposition of the fundamentals of anarchism. Now, move on to akratism and you’ll have something (an-arche will never exist since arche – differences in power – will arise naturally: the issue is a-kratos – the abolition of force).
Cheerio
GT
GT’s Market Rant
I view anarchy as the natural balance that occurs when all humans are granted absolute soveriegnty over themselves, not one individual excluded, nor placed higher than another in any way. ALL treated equally according to status, and only separated by talent and ability and what they contribute.
The story, “And then there were none” by Eric Frank Russell sums up this idea perfectly. It is this version of anarchy that is the only version that can work. It would take a major shift in consciousness for this to happen though. The vast majority of people must stop giving away their power to the elites for this to happen. Unfortunately, the elite’s grant the masses just enough “comfort” to buy compliance in their own slavery. Instant credit has enabled the elite to create a system whereby the masses happily enslave themselves in order to enjoy momentary comfort.
True balanced anarchy would be the best antidote to the elite control.
Here’s a great stopper I always end up using at some point in discussion with any type of government believer: “Just what gives me the right to tell you what to do?”
Works like a charm.
I am trying to figure out how I can exist without having to pay illegal and unconstitutional taxes to the beast that has become the present U.S. government.
try reading some Hobbes or Locke for a good definition of anarchy. In the state of nature, with no existing governmnent, one would have to assume government over oneself. But there is no absolute freedom in this kind of world either. Instead of money, strength would rule. The individual strength would win for a while, then men would come together to have collective strength. Now we have the makings of a government! Without government, life would be brutal and short. Would the natural state of nature really be a better place to live in than the world we have? I doubt it. (of course, i am assuming we are using the word anarchy to mean “absence of government”)
“True balanced anarchy would be the best antidote to the elite control.” – Ken Hill
balanced anarchy – a true oxymoron.
kim-
It’s not hard to stop paying income taxes, and there are many millions of Americans not paying them. How easy it would be for you would depend on what you do, but there is a huge cash economy. The one way it won’t work is if you work for a company that reports your wages to the IRS and withholds taxes to send there. Not even worth trying. In any other case it’s just always working for cash, running as little as possible through your bank account, paying bills with cash or money orders. Don’t file taxes and lie; that is tax fraud. Just don’t file. If you get paid by check, take it to their bank to cash. Offer a discount, 2,5,10% for being paid in cash. If the prospective client says no, you don’t want to work for them anyway. The rest of the taxes: property, license etc you have to pay. They are all just as much an imposition on your freedom as the income tax is, but they are local and the local sheriff enforces for the criminals calling themselves government. I closed my corp. in 1989, stopped filing, bought land, built a house, got my three kids through school, lived well, drove the vehicles I wanted, took vacations, ate well, enjoyed my life and work. Now I’m semi-retired and live in the Caribbean. The last thing an anarchist wants to do is support the state that is robbing them.
If you enjoyed (or hated) this article check out my other writing on the subject titled “Rational Anarchy: A Brief Definition”
http://www.rottingnation.com/2007/10/31/anarchy-a-brief-definition/
[...] good, concise article on why anarchists hate the state (which also attempts to explain what an anarchist and why they (we?) aren’t scary) led me to [...]