Anarchy is everything, in a sense.
Most literally, it simply means “no ruler.”
We can also see that “leader” in the above definition is not just a voluntarily assented to leader, such as a painting instructor or club president. “Archon” being the root of “monarch,” the difference is easy to understand. A ruler leverages violent force. A mere leader does not necessarily do so.
Anarchy does not mean “utopia” as no such thing ever has, or can ever (in this realm at least), exist. Anarchy does not necessarily mean “chaos” or “violence” — as goes the colloquial conception — or even “order” or “peace.” It could be argued that anarchy — like the sun and moon and mountains and sea — just…is.
Governments, international banking organizations, and supranational bodies already function in pure anarchy. There is no cohesive, singular ruler overseeing them, ultimately. Everyday people function in pure anarchy, too. Making consensual transactions and rejecting the use of violent force. Anarchy can be used, like any tool or basic reality, for good or not-so-good.
Voluntaryism is one kind of anarchy, which quite simply says: I own myself and my property and no human has greater rights than another human in that regard.
No one can own the body and property, the life, of another human legitimately — even if they call themselves a king, a cop, a priest, or an expert in medicine. All interactions should be consensual (don’t you believe in the golden rule?), and when someone violates or attempts to violate my body or property, I can defend myself. Property a la voluntaryism just means that which I acquire legitimately: by way of making, homesteading, or acquiring things through my body’s labor and/or trade, or inheriting them from a previous owner.
Property is an extension of one’s body, in this view. And, as all sane human individuals agree (whether tacitly or explicitly, in action or in word), that our bodies and lives are our own, this is thus a very solid basis upon which to base any society which holds non-violence as a value to be attained to a maximal degree.
Other methods fail. See: All around you.
Kings and states and other such religious people and groups claim vast swathes of land and jurisdiction over billions of other human beings just by mere say-so.
“I, Sir Graham of wherever, have been chosen by God to rule this land! Submit!”
And democracy is no better, ultimately. It’s just a euphemism for mob rule. In the same way “taxation” is a euphemism for literal extortion. I magically, as “King Graham,” do not only have dominion over my own home and land and body, but also over that of everyone that just happens to be born in the whole massive area I claim to own. I convince some gullible folks I am descended from the sky, or that it’s “God’s will” I become president, or that I have social justice in mind, and get useful idiots to scribble my decrees on paper after I’m chosen in a rigged election, and it becomes “the law” — whether or not the peaceful people to by ruled by said law agree with it all. Truly insane. Real fuckin’ nuthouse shit. And it’s called “civilized.”
If one looks honestly, most of the human-caused suffering — death and murder and thievery and rape and pillage and trafficking and torture and other such evil — has come from so-called nations and states. Governments. Countries. It hasn’t come from your neighbor down the street.
“Countries” are really nothing more than a group of mere individuals (often inept buffoons armed with sociopath charisma) claiming arbitrary power over you. It’s not even close: When it comes to statism’s body count versus the private sector, it is the statist, and not the anarchist, who needs to be defending their murderous, psychotic, utopian death cult.
To think that maximal peace could ever result from such an absurd arrangement is indeed utopian. The practical realization that there needs to be order and peace based on logical foundations such as a universal property norm (self-ownership), and not misguided attempts to “elect the right man” or bludgeon dissenters into submission, is voluntaryism. I don’t get to tell you what to do in non-violence with your body or property, and you don’t get to tell me, either. Most people actually already claim to believe this, anyway.
Constantly refusing to step into anarchy and the responsibility of one’s own life and self-ownership, in lieu of fawning over so-called “great man” leaders, is existential suicide. It takes guts and understanding to accept reality and own oneself. Until many more individuals step into their power here, and recognize this reality — attested to not only by human praxeology but biology itself (try to blink my eyes for me, or think my thoughts, or move my arm more directly and immediately than I can), the tyrants that rule and brainwash the masses will — tragically — hold their power.
Vile parasites disguised as “servants.”
Anarchy is beautiful, if we make it so. And many societies in history already have to some degree or another. Examples can be found from the tuatha of ancient Irelandto the everyday goings-on in your small town this very day. Cops and taxes (theft) aren’t required for you to not murder the local hairstylist or plumber. The person who would do that is a minuscule percentage of any population. And it is possible to have free market, privately funded defense organizations to defend against those fringe psychos. It’s a disgusting myth that humans are always evil and bad and want to harm each other. Believing this is what gives so-called governments their power. And excuses for keeping the provably illogical and immoral state around wouldn’t hold even if no example of historic anarchy “being tried” could be cited. The same way asking “but who will pick the cotton if we don’t have slaves!?!?” is irrelevant, so is asking, “but who will pay for things and protect us without the theft and murder of government!?”
Psychos often gravitate toward jobs in the state. Psychotic individuals and sociopaths love arbitrarily assigned seats of massive power over hundreds of millions of other people. Just look at politicians today: child molesters, restricters of the movement of others, and literal mass murderers.
That sure as hell ain’t your neighbor down the street. And if it was, you’d move away or decisively deal with the threat somehow, as soon as possible.
4 replies on “What Is Anarchy?”
Nice article once again! I saw you left Twitter?
Maybe you would like to try out diamondapp.com?
Stay well Graham!
Thanks very much. Yeah, I had to get off that greasy platform. Will look into diamond app. Cheers!
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] Dit artikel is geschrveen door Graham aka Volunatry Japan: What is anarchy? […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on さかなごっこ２ and commented:
LikeLiked by 1 person