“We want to be sure anyone who has this pizza on hand throws it away so they don’t get sick,” health officials told customers.
Isn’t that a definition of anarchy? No law enforcement, everything goes, including uncool things?
That’s how anarchy has been portrayed by propaganda media since time immemorial because it scares those in power.
Anarchy means without hierarchy. That’s it. Rules can still be agreed upon. It just means there isn’t one person, or group of elites, setting and enforcing the rules, but that they’re agreed upon by consensus.
Just like hierarchical systems, there are many different variations of anarchy. Very few, if any, serious forms call for chaos and everything goes.
Why? Because it would just lead straight back to Might is Right. “I’m bigger, stronger, more powerful than you, so I’ll make you do as I wish” isn’t a part of anarchist theory.
Anarchism, despite seeming a simple concept on paper, is a difficult and complicated idea. Not because of the core principles but because humans and human behaviour are weird and hypocritical at times.
Rules can still be agreed upon.
Congratulations, you have invented a Socialist Democracy that will inevitably lead to authoritarianism.
You cosplayers don’t get the concept at all do you?
Go back to listening to Green Day and Rage Against the Machine and keep convincing yourself that you want to see the industrial world burn.
But it’s the exact same thing. If there’s no hierarchy of some kind, then who’s going to enforce the law? Like putting criminals in jail and prevent violence on the streets?
So I don’t consider myself an anarchist, but the various types of anarchy have come up with answers to this question. Generally, they rely on more social cohesion to enforce social rules. Private property would not be a thing, which cuts out a lot of laws in itself.
