Anarchy, especially when referred to by pop-culture, is often seen as synonymous with chaos. In the popular movie V for Vendetta, for example, a character who is robbing a convenience store at gunpoint can be seen yelling, “Anarchy in the U.K.!” Movies like SLC Punk and The Anarchist Cookbook also seem to exemplify this erroneous definition. Anarchy in its true form, however, is not a synonym for chaos – it is an antonym.

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines Anarchy as, put simply, an “absence of government.” To truly understand the concept, however, one must expound upon this definition. First, it must be understood that there are many schools of thought when it comes to Anarchy. For example, there are Communist-Anarchists and Collectivist-Anarchists, both of which believe that the means of production should be mutually owned by the people. This situation, however, seems to be incongruent with Anarchist principles as involuntary coercive force would need to be placed upon an individual in order to achieve it. Why should someone who owns a factory, one where people have the ability to leave if they do not like their working conditions, be forced to give up their business to the collective? Force is the key word and a true Anarchist should believe that coercive force, unless in self-defense, should never be tolerated, hence their denial of the legitimacy of government which is nothing more than a legalized monopoly on the use of force.

A true Anarchist is not opposed to the government per se, but opposed to all forms of legalized aggression. Murray Rothbard, a leading Anarchist theorist, in his book Society and State, defines an Anarchist society as one “where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of any individual.” The Anarchist opposes, not the state, but the inherently immoral actions of the state i.e. property theft via involuntary taxation. In the eyes of an Anarchist, this is a legalized form of aggressive force and should not be allowed in a civilized society.

Therefore, an Anarchist society is based in the voluntary trade of property (such as money, goods, or land) and services in order to maximize individual liberty and prosperity. Though Rothbardian Anarchists tend to believe in private property rights (as opposed to Communist or Collectivist Anarchists), it is still possible for non-state common property to exist based on voluntary agreements. For example, a group of people, possibly a non-profit organization, could own a park in which they allow the public to visit. Private property rights are essential to a functioning Anarchist society even though they are often dismissed as evil by some Collectivist or Communist Anarchists.

With Anarchy, property rights are vital in keeping an orderly society. Each and every property owner is king on his or her own land and is free to make whatever rules they choose. If a person does not want to follow those rules then they are free to avoid that property. As soon as a person steps foot onto a person’s property, however, they are consenting to agree to the property owners rules. Private communities and homeowners’ associations are examples of this concept working in today’s world, albeit in a restricted form. A private community in present day America, for example, would not be allowed to make its own rules with regard to drug use or polygamy.

Ave Maria, Florida, a town created and owned by Domino’s Pizza founder and Roman Catholic philanthropist Tom Monaghan, is a more specific example of this concept. It is a planned community that is currently under development in Collier County. The new community will have a five thousand student Roman Catholic university, coined Ave Maria University, and will contain upwards of eight thousand residential units. Since Mr. Monaghan owns all of the land he has made specific rules, consistent with the Roman Catholic faith, which people must obey if they wish to obtain a lease for any of the property. For example, if a person wishes to obtain a commercial lease on the land, then they must obey strict rules prohibiting the sale of contraceptives and pornography and the performance of abortions. If a person does not agree to these provisions, then they do not have to open a business or live in Ave Maria.

America was founded on the principle that a government can only obtain legitimacy from the consent of the people. The Declaration of Independence, in fact, states “… to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Consent is the key word in that phrase and is one that the founders should have paid more attention to; they came up short when deciding to form a representative Democracy.

In a Democracy, there is never one hundred percent consent; there is always a minority, no matter how small, that does not agree with a given action performed by the government and that minority will always be suppressed. In contrast, Anarchy allows a person to choose the rules that they will follow and hence how they will be governed, if at all. This leads to the sublime realization that inside an Anarchist society Communists, Collectivist-Anarchists, Democracies, Communist-Anarchists, and even Authoritarian governments can all coexist. Anyone who wanted to live under any of these forms of government would simply need to buy or homestead land and make the corresponding stipulations. Or they could join such a community if it already existed. Freedom of choice is an underlying principle in Anarchy and it is consistent with the principles that the United States of America was founded on.

Henry David Thoreau said it best and it would be a miscarriage of logic to rewrite what has already been said so well, “I heartily accept the motto,—‘That government is best which governs least’ and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe,—‘That government is best which governs not at all;’ and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.”

digg it | reddit 

I recently posted a public blog on the social bookmarking site Shoutwire.com about the PA government shutdown. Turns out, that it sparked a good bit of friendly debate. Come join me in arguing with the statists and socialists and help spread the message of personal freedom!

I myself woke up this morning breathing air like I have every other day in the past.  I went through my morning ritual — brushed my teeth, showered, and updated my mp3 player with last nights episode of free talk live — and went to work.   I noticed nothing out of the ordinary.  

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that elected state bureaucrat Ed Rendell had partially shut down the government!  Where were the riots? Where was the chaos?  Where was the “Anarchy”?  People seemed to be going on with their lives like any other day.  Did they not realize the catastrophe that occurred earlier this morning?

Then suddenly, a question came to mind like the initial spark that lights a brush fire:  Is it possible for life to continue without the intrusion of the government? 

I pondered this for a while and came to a dramatic conclusion:  If we can survive without the functions of the government that were abruptly put on pause today, then maybe we don’t need to government for some of its so-called essential functions.  Maybe schools and health care can be provided more effectively in a true, unregulated free market.  And maybe, just maybe we don’t need federal bureaucracies like the FCC, FDA, FAA, TSA, NSA, CIA and others intruding in our everyday lives. 

It is something to think about.  We Pennsylvanians are surviving just fine without the state government.  Maybe you can too.

digg it | shout it