A case against anarchism
I’ve previously written about the ideology of socialism and how I am an adamant, enigmatic critic of many of its principle declarations, as well as its global implementations.
The ideology of anarchism, on the other hand, is an ideology that is completely different altogether.
Since I fall to the right side of the political spectrum and believe in many conservative and libertarian doctrines, anarchism is an ideology that has always struck me as being intrinsically unique.
An ideology that champions the individual, its doctrines seemingly fall right into place with libertarianism, right?
Here is a case against anarchism and how it is nonsensical to believe in its ridiculous, ideological claims.
Anarchism is an ideology that is predominantly defined by the total rejection of the state, as well as all other forms of social hierarchy (though definitions differ slightly depending on the anarchist).
It’s an ideology that claims religion, private property and government have forced citizens into subservience and pulled the curtain over their eyes so that they cannot look upon their true reality.
Unlike socialism, which seeks to establish proletariat rule for the betterment of the worker, anarchism is much more utopian. It calls for the abolishment of government altogether in order to make individuals the true governors of themselves.
Yes, you read that right.
To begin my critique, show me an anarchist society that is stable, functioning and ideologically sound.
There is no such thing.
Because hierarchy is necessary in order to survive. Human organization naturally and logically gravitates toward some type of social hierarchy.
Why do you think governments have come to exist in the first place?
Contrary to what anarchists preach, government protects the citizen. It does not blind the citizen or unjustly subdue the citizen. It helps maintain social order so that the individual may blossom within a civil, controlled environment.
Furthermore, I’d argue that religion does the same. Anarchists claim religion puts God first and man second, which inevitably, makes man subservient.
Religion, according to how the individual may see it, is a private, voluntary social contract that is entered freely for the betterment of that individual, by that individual.
Anarchists claim that society will become organized simply because individuals will be free to do what they want. Naturally, they insist, everything needed by society will consequently be done by society.
How utopian is this? I have never come across a more ridiculous ideological statement.
Being free from man-made hierarchy does not free the individual from jealousy, greed, anger and evil. Emotions exist independently from any man-made societal structure. Obviously then, eliminating any sort of social hierarchy is eliminating any sort of consequence for any malevolent action an individual may commit.
By preaching anarchy, anarchists indirectly contribute to their own downfall. Never has there been an anarchist society and never will there be enough educated citizens to buy in to such a ludicrous, absurd and idiotic ideology.