What are your opinions about Anarchy?

Question

Without sounding like a zealot, please tell me what you feel about Anarchy... in any system.

As a bottom-up theory of governance... Self-governed... proposition.

Too bad this isn't a real forum where we could all chat... I forgot about that aspect... I cannot respectfully respond to comments.

Answer 1

Anarchism as a philosophy of political and social organisation derives from twin impulses. One is democratic, and is the desire of people to participate in those decisions which directly affect them. We see many outgrowths of this impulse within and without anarchism. Anarchism is also referred to sometimes as direct democracy.

The other impulse is economic, and is the desire to have a say in one's productive activities -- both in their organisation (which shift do I work), and in the distribution of profits from that. In other words, for working people to be the most important of the stakeholders in an enterprise.

It is in the last aspect that anarchism, or some forms of it, most differ from what we call socialism (which is the ownership of economic enterprises by the state), and capitalism (which is the ownership of economic enterprises by an investor class). In this case, anarchism is sometimes called 'Libertarian Socialism' or 'Worker Control or Co-op.'

Yes, I'm in favor of co-ordinated direct democracies, that can work on a larger scale as well as on a local one. I'm also in favour of worker co-ops, especially where they can access investment from other sources. Where these have been tried through history one generally sees an improvement in efficiency, productivity, and the mental well-being of the workers involved. It is also a way, through the distribution of profits, to enhance the spending power of labor without setting off inflationary cycles.

Answer 2

They experimented with anarchism during the Spanish Civil War, when the CNT labor union took over Barcelona's factories and farms. The Spanish anarchist Manolo Gonzalez even wrote a series of articles about it called "Life In Revolutionary Barcelona" which you should Google if you're interested. It worked for a while in Spain, but it occurred during a civil war between Communists, Fascists, republicans and anarchists. Since the Fascists had the military upper hand, the CNT's social experiment was crushed under the pressures of wartime.

My personal opinion is that it couldn't work. Not because of the usual reasons people say (crime, the laziness/ugliness of human nature, etc.), but because anarchism as a political philosophy is really way too old. All the major anarchist thinkers (Kropotkin, Bakunin, etc.) were people born in the 19th century -- but we live in the 21st century and life is completely different from back in those days. It's a philosophy from the Industrial Revolution, but all of the developed nations on this planet are post-industrial economies. It's an interesting idea, but an obsolete interesting idea is still obsolete.

Answer 3

Oh boy what a loaded question. I dont believe it works at all. The off with their heads is just not in fashion. However a team of people that work to iron out the mistakes in government is okay but as a team of civilized individuals. More Parlimentary than a mob of mindless people. Usually anarchy is exactly just like that a mob being led by frustrated individuals, and they waited too long to address the problems properly so they end up in violence. That to me is silly. So no I would not prefer anarchy unless we became fascists, or communists, totalitarianists, then I would be sitting right there at the guillotine with my knitting needles too.

Answer 4

Haha...you pick to be an anarchist that works in the policies? you have 2 alternatives. a million. be an anarchist. Do your element. in case you get in hassle combat it on the grounds of freedom and helping anarchy; or 2. understand that anarchy is a organic gadget and prefer each organic platforms won't paintings. seem at similiar platforms (actual socialism, unrestrained capitalism, constrained gov't direct democracy, etc.) and charm a merge of them that's sensible to you. ____ Civil: NA's did no longer stay in anarchy. Please go study a e book. there have been complicated policies for the tribal society, it grow to be no longer anarchy.

Answer 5

The sole anarchy concept is impossible. As humans, we always have power roles, authorities and followers. Let's start with the simplest human organization: the family. Either your mom or your dad has the authority title, while kids are just members of that society. Government is just a developed form of authority.

Answer 6

Government is a necessary evil because of the nature of man, mostly his selfishness (who would provide for the defense, infrastructure such as roads, and educational institutions?) Nobody if there was anarchy, and be sure to watch your...back...

Answer 7

Anarchy is the name for the onset of "cancer' in the society. Like cells going crazy, suddenly, and proliferating and attacking body parts, near and distant, Anarchy strikes the body of the society. There is destruction of the order, onset of chaos and finally death to the peace of the society.

Answer 8

True anarchy is no more feasible or possible as a governmental system than true Marxism or true Communism.

The idea of anarchy is basically to leave each to his or her own. Can we as humans do that? Hardly.

Answer 9

Based on the fact that anarchy has never been adopted by a group as the mode of operation, I think it's safe to say that it is against human nature to be anarchical. As soon as it begins, it ends.

Answer 10

Anarchy is impossible. The strong will invariably assert themselves over the weak, and therein lies the roots of government.