Anarchism, the purest form of Democracy

Anarchism, the purest form of Democracy

Anarchism is often equated with anarchy. This is an understandable mistake. Anarchy implies chaos, disorder, and confusion resulting from the absence of government. Few, if any, anarchists advocate such a state of affairs. Indeed, they contend that the opposite will result from the elimination of government. Essentially, anarchists believe that human beings have outgrown the need for government --- if, indeed, they ever needed it in the first place. .

However, government, it is assumed, was created to facilitate human development; not to impede people from fulfilling their potentials. The anarchists, in fact, want to end the institutional government; they do not advocate anarchy. They believe that the most important form of government is individual self-government. Because of its reliance on human self-government, as Leon P. Baradat writes, anarchism is the purest form of democracy.

What social and economic conditions led to the development of anarchism?

Arising from a reaction to the growing power of government and the increasing influence of capitalism, anarchism developed among a small but highly motivated number of people. Even as the imperatives of the Industrial Revolution motivated some people to seek more popular participation in government, others agitated for social organization without institutional government.

As Europe industrialized, wealth was concentrated in the hands of the few, and power was centralized in the state. Feelings of impotence and helplessness overcame workers who saw their skills made obsolete by machines and who consequently were put to mindless, repetitive tasks. Where once they had produced whole products, they now found themselves paid a pittance, doing jobs that required little skill. The simple life of the peasant evaporated as people were forced to live in squalid ghettoes surrounding the factories. The government, once remote, began to play an increasing role in the lives of individuals, promulgating restrictions and issuing regulations, giving orders and making demands.

Ironically, as the institution of government became more pervasive, the people in government became more anonymous. Growing with its new tasks, a faceless bureaucracy confronted the common people, imposing its will with vigor, even as it became abstract and ambiguous in form.

Although opposition to organized government can be traced as far back as ancient Greece, anarchism as an ideology and as a political movement did not take shape until the early 19 century, with the rise of the Industrial Revolution and improved forms of communication. It was then that means of government and of social control considered as impediments to human development.

In what ways do anarchists disagree with one another and on what do they agree?

Anarchists of all sorts see government as an impediment to human progress and wish to eliminate it in part or even completely. But, they disagree with each other in their tactics or approaches. For example, social anarchists wish to free individuals from governmental restraints so that the individuals can do the greatest good possible for society as a whole. By contrast, individualist anarchists seek to limit government so that individuals can accomplish the greatest good for themselves alone. Again, anarchists can be pacifistic or violent, devout or atheistic, socialist or capitalist. Indeed, except for the reduction or elimination of government, there are few things on which anarchists agree.

How can individualist and social anarchism be compared and contrasted?

Social anarchists oppose government because they believe that it limits the freedom of people. However, they are not interested in the individual freedom solely for the individual's own sake. They hold that individuals are all related to each other and are responsible to each other; they must work for the collective good. Such is not the case with individualist anarchists. They recognize individual only for the individual and not for the society. This exceeds the confines of what is usually understood as individualism. These anarchists promote a concept that might better be termed individualistism. The founder of individualist anarchists is Max Stirner (1806-1856), a German philosopher and social critic. He believed that society's institutions, including government and religion, are artificial props.

How can the ideas of Godwin, Proudhon, Tolstoy, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Goldman, Stirner, and Rand be compared and contrasted?

William Godwin (1756-1836), Pierre Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865), and Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910), belong to the pacifist thinkers. Godwin saw the church and the state as conspiracies to benefit a few at the expense of many. He advocated gender equality and social equality. If people left to their own impulses people would naturally create a harmonious society in which all would benefit and none would suffer at the hands of others, he opined. Proudhon gave anarchism the philosophical depth and economic perspective that made it a viable political ideology in the modern world. Society, according to him, should be restructured into voluntary associations. In fact, anarcho-syndicalism was invented by Proudhon. People should be liberated from both capitalism and state, he believed. The workers should ignore the traditional authority and organize the syndicates. Leo Tolstoy believed that the state resulted from imposition of power by the strong over the weak; force theory of the origin of the state. Tolstoy called on the Russian people to destroy the state, yet he cautioned against the use of revolution for the cause. He was religious, a Christian, called on people to recognize only one law that is the law of God. The proper response to government, he said, was to simply ignore it. When the state issues an order, the people should drop their hands and walk away. Tolstoy believed that this technique, today called passive resistance, would spell the doom of government. When official violence is met only with persistent nonviolence, the absurdity of government force quickly becomes evident and that government itself loses moral justification. This idea was well understood by the India's great leader Gandhi. Gandhi taught his people to resist the British colonial government with quite, firm, nonviolent disobedience. In short, the pacifists generally discouraged the use of violence as an unnecessary tool to bring about needed changes.

Mikhail Bakunin (1814-1876), Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921), Enrico Malatesta (1853-1932), and Emma Goldman (1869-1940), belong to the revolutionary camp of anarchism. Bakunin also resisted both church and state as oppressive institutions. He advocated atheism terrorism, destruction, revolution and violence. He is considered to be the founder of violent anarchism. More radical even than Karl Marx who at least called for revolution by honest working people, Bakunin contented that a successful revolution would come about by arming the underworld of society --- its vagabonds, pimps, thieves, and murderers. He rejected all forms of human conformity. His ideas are credited with inciting assassinations, terrorism, and rebellion in many nations. His philosophy had a great impact on subsequent anarchists and other radicals. It was particularly popular among the peasants of Italy, Ukraine, and Spain. Peter Kropotkin believed that it is government that divides person against person, class against class, and country against country. With the elimination of state people could be educated to accept a non-coercive political stance and an economy based on mutual cooperation and sharing. Malatesta believed that only revolution can bring about the new world of human harmony. Goldman is regarded as the most important anarchist in the US history. She often brought crowds to their feet and the police to her door.

Max Stirner (1806-1856) and Ayn Rand (1905-1982) belong to the individualist anarchism. They recognize only the individual, denying any obligation or even much value to interrelationships among people. Exceeding the confines of what is usually understood as individualism; these anarchists promote a concept that might better be termed individualistism. According to these anarchists, society's institutions and religions are artificial and contrived barriers to the development of individual. The concept, in this context, is known as "the sovereignty of the individual." Stirner encourages each person to act without regard to the society as a whole. People should refuse recognition of their supposed obligations to others, thus liberating themselves from the artificial fetters unrightfully imposed upon them. Rand's popularity in the US stems from her laissez-faire economic ideas; her atomistic approach is deeply rooted in the fabric of American society as well.

What are the fundamental ideas of nihilism, and to what historical era does it belong?

The most frustrated group of radicals, the Nihilists abandoned all hope of reform and came to believe that society itself had to be brought down. The term nihilist was first introduced in Fathers and Sons, a novel by Ivan Turgenev. Developing the most chaotic, violent, and destructive variant of anarchist theories, the Nihilists were prominent between the 1860s and 1880s. Nihilist philosophy contended that government was so rotten, so corrupt, so decayed that it was beyond repair. The most notorious Nihilist was Sergi Nechayev (1847-1882). A protégé of Bakunin, Nechayev schemed and plotted unscrupulously. Devoted to only one idea, the destruction of state, he lied, cheated, and even murdered his own co-conspirators.

Nihilism (from Latin nihil, “nothing”), designation applied to various radical philosophies, usually by their opponents, the implication being that adherents of these philosophies reject all positive values and believe in nothing. Nihilism was first used to describe Christian heretics during the Middle Ages. In Russia it was applied in the 1850s and 1860s to young intellectuals who, influenced by Western ideas, repudiated Christianity, considered Russian society backward and oppressive, and advocated revolutionary change. The best-known fictional nihilist was Bazarov in Ivan Turgenev's novel Fathers and Sons (1862). Conservatives claimed that nihilism would destroy all possibility of orderly and purposeful existence and was directly contrary to real human needs and desires, but the novelist N. G. Chernyshevsky and other radicals called it a necessary phase in the transformation of Russia. The Narodniks (Populists), who worked for a peasant uprising in the 1870s, and the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) movement, members of which assassinated Tsar Alexander II in 1881, were also considered manifestations of nihilism. Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2008. © 1993-2007 Microsoft Corporation.

How does the modern American militant civilian militia movement relate to anarchism?

Certain sections of the US citizens have anarchist tendencies. They view some government institutions or public policies preventive, denying the American people their liberties. The following institutions are just few examples. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and so on. These institutions are looked upon as conspirators to rob Americans of their freedom. They hold that federal government is secretly controlled by sinister forces or satanic forces. According to Baradat, an estimated 20,000 to 45000 American citizens have joined 300 militia groups scattered across forty states of the Union. Although large differences separate many of these groups, certain similarities among them have become clear. They all see government as being the captive of evil forces that are bent on enslaving them and abolishing their personal liberties. Their reading of the Second Amendment to the US constitution assures them of the right to keep arms without government interference. Finally, violent confrontation is viewed as imminent between the government and those who feel they must righteously defend their individual liberties against the encroachment of federal laws and law enforcers.

Read the full and original text (pp.131-147), Leon P Baradat, Professor Emeritus Mira Costa College, Political Ideologies: Their origins & impact (9^th edition, New Delhi, 2006), Prentice Hall India 

http://www.ahmadrezataheri.org/