|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Mar 15, 2010 8:17 pm |
|
re: Transition to benevolent anarchy |
James Booth
| |
.
"If I want your thing, I'll just slit your throat and take it."
In my view, that line speaks to the core of misperceptions about *anarchy*.
A "society" devoid of "order" or established *authority* (authoritarian control) is not necessarily devoid of *core values*.
A person may *think* "I'll just slit your throat and take it"
- yet even in an anarchical setting, that person may have been raised to understand that such action will lead to loss of one's own *Life, Liberty and / or pursuit of Happiness*
It may very well be the majority of individuals raised in a particular "anarchical" setting have been raised to understand there are certain limits on individual behaviour - REGARDLESS there being no "sheriff" about, when it is clear that if "mob rule" says your behaviour (stealing, killing, etc.) is not in the "best interest" of community you stand to forfeit any continued Right to act; ie. you may lose your hand (or some other body part), or your life.
NOT because there is any *written law* but because the community "polices" itself for its own survival - the same as any family or collective or "loosely affiliated" group does.
Webster includes within defining "anarchy":
"a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government"
... thus designating anarchy as "an impractical scheme for social improvement"
Impractical in the sense no individual has *complete* freedom
- including, "freedom" to steal, kill, etc.
A society "perfectly" devoid of order is as much "impractical" and imaginary as the idea of having complete freedom.
The bottom line here is that prohibitions against such behaviour toward other individuals has been "set in stone" by religions and cultures - most of which pre-date Christianity - going as far back in human history as one can dig.
There IS a *natural* order of "things" no matter how humans pretend to set themselves apart from Nature.
Rather than *fear* relative anarchy, know instead that people generally want to live, they want to act independently to the greatest degree possible, and they want to accumulate "stuff" which appeals to them.
Generally speaking, that is what every one of us wants in life basically, and that is the SAME as "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
It is basic to our existence, in our genes, and we can "hold" each other to that easily.
It is THE non-verbal "contract" we have with all other individuals, and sure, one or another will be dopey enough to "take a different path"
... but only so long as he is allowed to breathe the same air as the rest of us.
Otherwise, mothers would not try to defend their babies, and none of us would be here even to talk about any of this.
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth (new win) |
|
| |
|
