What is Anarchy?

Anarchy means “without ruler”.  Much like Robert LeFevre’s “autarchy” which he defines as “self rule” or “self government”.  Here is a take from Simon Black of SovereignMan.com:

To start off, John asks: “Hi Simon- you don’t talk about politics much, though I have a feeling where you stand by reading your letter each day. Can you give me a better idea of how you see the world, politically?”

First and foremost, I want to make an important distinction. I am an avowed anarchist. Just the word itself has an incredibly negative connotation– it conjures images of subversion, treachery, and treason… or at least crazy guys hoarding guns in Montana.

People too often confuse ‘anarchy’ with ‘chaos’, usually citing examples like “if there were no laws, what would keep people from driving on the wrong side of the road?” or “who would come and put out the fire when your house is burning?”

These arguments are weak and only serve to indicate the extent to which governments have brainwashed people. Most citizens now believe that the political establishment is vital for their own survival, as if we would all spontaneously combust were it not for the FDA.

Anarchy is not chaos. The political establishment is chaos. Politicians have a horrific track record managing wars, finances, education, health care, and just about everything else they put their hands on… all at the expense of public resources.  Very little changes for the better, at least thanks to the government.

And yet, every few years, we still put on a charade to cast our vote, as if this ridiculous exercise has any meaning whatsoever. It’s an unpopular thing to say, but participating in the political process is a complete waste of time… particularly since we have a much more powerful voice.

The most important votes we cast are as consumers, not constituents… we vote with our dollars every single day. The best candidates, i.e. the producers, win our votes, and the worst candidates go bust. No amount of baby-kissing can save a defunct company.

Hell, not even a government bailout could keep Chrysler and GM alive.

Personally, I would prefer to have all of my tax dollars back in my pocket and pay a usage fee for privatized roads, or an annual subscription for a privatized library, rather than have some bureaucrat funding pet projects with my hard-earned money.

I recognize that this is all just a pipe dream, at least for now. Political institutions are here to stay, and the trend is bigger government, not more limited governments.

That’s one of the reasons why I have chosen this lifestyle– with a multiple flags approach, I minimize the impact that any single government has on my life.

Advertisements

3 responses to “What is Anarchy?

  1. Very interesting reading – also very agreeable.

  2. At one time, I lived in rual Arizona. The fire department was a private company, not city or county owned. Residents paid a yearly fee. But, even if you didn’t pay a fee, the fire department would not let your house burn down. I found this out when, one day, my wife had a grease fire on the stove top and called the fire department. They came out (the fire was out by that time) and made sure all was safe. They billed us, but gave us the option of joining the cooperative, which we did. No government was necessary for this needed service.

  3. Just a couple of points.
    Surely the political establishment isn’t chaos, it’s a deliberate, sustained attack on individuals designed to control them.
    As for using tax dollars who would levy the taxes and for what purpose?
    After the removal of ‘political control’ and replacement of ‘ownership’ with communality and co-operation taxes would end.