MAN, ARCHY

            And so here I sit; having just finished my Pizza Hut pizza, which I had to walk past no fewer than a dozen independently owned local businesses to get by the way; contemplating anarchism, surrealism, pranks, frauds, and the like. The only thing I can possibly deduce for certain is that there is no right. For that matter, there is no wrong either, but that should go without saying. Had, I done the “anarchist” thing, I would have just finished some Indian food, and this would not have begun, and would not be unraveling in the manner that it has, and, in fact, is. Everything is simply an event that leads to whatever follows after it. Events are indivisible from history. They “are”, and forever will be, one and the same. It is impossible, no, just folly to say, “If just this one thing would have been different.” For in the reality of the world, there is no such thing as a control.

            How does anarchy fit into this? I believe, very strongly, that political revolutions come secondary to individual revolutions. We must revolutionize thought before we can hope to revolutionize society; for society is nothing more than an extension of the individual. In order for anarchy to have a chance, people must first change on a personal level. Perhaps a few things, specifically the operational definitions of anarchy I am referring to, should be cleared up at this point. Anarchy is a system of social organization based on agreement and consent, rather than law and power. It is predicated on the belief that all systems of government are upheld and maintained through violence in all of it's various forms, and therefore; wrong. It is not the, “wild in the streets,” style of anarchy that, in recent years has hijacked the term that we are dealing with, but rather the vision and pursuit of a better society; a society were people cooperate, not because they are made to, but because that is simply what they do. Idyllic, perhaps, but there is nothing wrong with idealism. Without idealism we would have very little progress. Idealism, at the very least, is hope; hope that there is a better way. Anarchy is a supposed better way. It is not chaotic, but cooperative. It is not destructive, but creative. Anarchy's goal is the obliteration of laws, power, and class through the dissolution of their necessity. It is founded upon an organic agreement between human beings. It is a highly organized system, not lawless chaos and disorder. It is a system of necessity and pragmatism. All needs are met, and all tasks are taken care of through the understanding of one's own responsibility. Responsibility; actually, the key to anarchy's success. Taking responsibility for one's own actions. It is a caring, nurturing, libertarian, system. It is truly a system of the people, for there is nothing more to it than people.

            This may all seem a bit contrary to the common notion of anarchism. Mostly one thinks of riots, protestors, youth revolts, black clothing, and destruction. That is a part of modern anarchism, certainly, but what of all this talk of cooperation and responsibility? That doesn't seem to fit in with these images that spring to mind. The fact remains, however, that this ideal society, the cooperation, this organized system of agreement between individuals is the ultimate goal of true anarchy. It, in theory, is to incorporate everyone. Of course there are those who use the ideas of anarchy for different reasons, but please name one political or philosophical idea where this does not occur.