Is Anarchy Really Possible?
A discussion of anarchy as a philosophical proposition. Its impossibility is defended.
Unlike Conservatism, the traditionalist right has generally had a soft spot in its heart, never in its head, for the consideration of philosophical anarchy versus government or, rather, the opposition to existence of often nasty, oppressive, repressive, despotic, authoritarian, or totalitarian regimes merely posing as legitimate governments, thus, a romantic look at anarchy occurs. Libertarianism has been well said to have a soft spot for Anarchism in its head, though not really in its true heart.
The Inherent Problems
There are, however, both perennial and insoluble problems with the political proposition of anarchy. Any true power, anarchic force(s), that would be really powerful enough to come to fully overthrow any truly despotic regime must be either 1.) at least equal to or 2.) greater than the corrupt regime to be eliminated by the finalized revolution or revolt attempted.
But, the forever, inherent problematic and resulting irony always integrally and, thus, very necessarily involved is that such a posited actual power must then either 1.) come to functionally act as or 2.) be the logically resulting replacement for the regime that was so eliminated, for power, inclusive of political power, naturally abhors a vacuum.
Chaos, logically ever consequent upon the creation of anarchy, cannot last as a condition forever. [Napoleon's overthrow, for instance, of the Directory was merely meant to establish his dictatorship. Anarchism, needless to say, did not become an option.]
It is, thus, the ever present and irrefutable and undeniable conundrum of Anarchism if ever really put to the empirical test of events and men in the real world of action, not purely speculative contemplation or theoretical suppositions. Thus, Anarchism, the total negation of any government, in the real world would, consequently, both definitely contradict and, moreover, totally refute Anarchism in its simply ideological contentions. The absolute propositions, defined by the above cited and repeated numbers 1 and 2, have never, in fact, been overcome by any historical examples to the contrary, only by many utopian speculations of simply assumed possibilities having never had any solid correlation on this all-too-real earth.
Mere Regimes versus True Governments
While anarchy may seem to promise a great deal of freedom and liberty usually unknown under the rule of governments or regimes, this is the constant confusion of liberty with mere license as thoughts of libertarian fulfillment degrade surely into vile libertine excess gone mad; decadent minds that cannot raise their sights much above that of a whorehouse, as history has repeatedly demonstrated, again and again, infallibly, are not likely to love true liberty more than their mortal lusts or sensate carnality.
Liked it


-
-
Post CommentAnonym anarchist
On February 27, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Right though anarchy did exist in some periods of history
(Somalia 1991, France 1792…).
Jas Writer
On July 1, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Thank you for commenting. It is appreciated. Anarchy is very interesting as a theoretical proposition, of course. In reality, the problems always inherent within it are too fundamental; it forever falls by its own weight, unfortunately. Ideally, on the other hand, it’s something to still think about for other reasons.