Anarchy simply means "no king" (an + archy). it has a grand tradition of peace and prosperity, and so the perfectly good description of a fine milieu has been abused to mean the exact opposite in general use, that is instead of peace and prosperity, the implication of anarchy, people associate anarchy with chaos. The funny thing is kings, states and such hegemon centered entities bring with them chaos. The hegemon always presents what must be the finest example of a false dilemma ever devised: hegemon or chaos. Well, the hegemon is chaos, so in essence chaos v chaos. Like when the British queried the Irish, indeed everyone, what would your country be like without us ruling you?
Of course, the question was considered between a British overloard and an English speaking colonial subject, and as such harldy represents the colonized people. Preaching to the choir, the British came to believe their own PR, disastrously, as all Hegemons do.
Believing your own PR is probably the worst mistake you can make in human relations.
In the case of the Irish, those who wanted to overthrow the Brits were in fact those who benefitted most from british occupation. They did not want anything to change, they just wanted to be in charge. And indeed they did get there. As soon as the Brits quit Ireland, a civil war broke out, to the amusement of the British, and an example for all other colonials.
Anarchists, properly defined are not against heirarchy or order. Quite the contrary. they believe in leadership, and rules, but a constant flowing regime with certain aspects:
1. The regime is voluntary, you can participate or not, up to you.
2. It is nonviolent. It has no sanction for non-participation or malefaction except shunning.
The hegemon needs both, can not work without both. People need neither, but sadly, we have voters, and in his way people harmed are not victims, but complicit perpetrators in their own degeneration.
We have had working anarchy, relative justice, peace and prosperity, many times in history... the earliest record is the 400 years after Exodus, there is the Iceland 200 year experience, Carthage may have been, but just not enough information, and the American West 1820s on until the 1870s is a surprisingly good example.
Even when regimes are operating at their nadir, with their requisite "monopoly on violence within a given territory" we still have working anarchistic regimes, which the lawyers call "private law." Lex mercatoria has been around 1000 years, and states find they must comply with this private law if they wish to benefit from world trade. Try as they might to fight it, anarchy wins.
I am an anarchist because it is the only politics that can approximate, justice, peace and prosperity.
Feel Free To Email This To Three Friends.
Of course, the question was considered between a British overloard and an English speaking colonial subject, and as such harldy represents the colonized people. Preaching to the choir, the British came to believe their own PR, disastrously, as all Hegemons do.
Believing your own PR is probably the worst mistake you can make in human relations.
In the case of the Irish, those who wanted to overthrow the Brits were in fact those who benefitted most from british occupation. They did not want anything to change, they just wanted to be in charge. And indeed they did get there. As soon as the Brits quit Ireland, a civil war broke out, to the amusement of the British, and an example for all other colonials.
Anarchists, properly defined are not against heirarchy or order. Quite the contrary. they believe in leadership, and rules, but a constant flowing regime with certain aspects:
1. The regime is voluntary, you can participate or not, up to you.
2. It is nonviolent. It has no sanction for non-participation or malefaction except shunning.
The hegemon needs both, can not work without both. People need neither, but sadly, we have voters, and in his way people harmed are not victims, but complicit perpetrators in their own degeneration.
We have had working anarchy, relative justice, peace and prosperity, many times in history... the earliest record is the 400 years after Exodus, there is the Iceland 200 year experience, Carthage may have been, but just not enough information, and the American West 1820s on until the 1870s is a surprisingly good example.
Even when regimes are operating at their nadir, with their requisite "monopoly on violence within a given territory" we still have working anarchistic regimes, which the lawyers call "private law." Lex mercatoria has been around 1000 years, and states find they must comply with this private law if they wish to benefit from world trade. Try as they might to fight it, anarchy wins.
I am an anarchist because it is the only politics that can approximate, justice, peace and prosperity.
Feel Free To Email This To Three Friends.
No comments:
Post a Comment