Anarchism, Term Paper Example

I think anarchism sets out the best way to organize society. The most proper way to organize a society is for them to find this organization on their own. A key reason for adopting this position is that by imposing laws and unnatural structures, people are always forced to take on roles that they do not wish to have. In doing so, tension is created that eventually persuade people to break from these roles, resulting in chaos. In addition, the only way to prevent such chaos is by preventing requirements for society. All people should be allowed to live the ways they choose. In doing so, law and justice will be simplified. Under government systems, individuals will be forced to work together in a manner in which no one holds a significant amount of power. Three ideologies that contrast the level of organization that anarchism can offer include liberalism, conservatism, and Marxism because these ideas do not allow people to truly exercise freedoms. As such, people will break way from these organized structures and they are not practical in reality.

Many individuals believe that anarchy is not a reasonable way to organize society because there is no structure involved in anarchy whatsoever. Anarchy, by definition, is the complete lack of a government (Anarchism lecture). This restores power to the individual. In societies with structures in place, it is essential for the ruling body to decide which actions are moral and which are not. In an anarchy, this is the right of the individual. Thus, when individuals are allowed to contribute to the organization of their individual lives, organization on a greater level is seen. People will work together, understanding that they need to have multiple roles to be successful. Taking away the power from groups or individuals allows one to add greater structure in their own lives, forming their own communities with like-minded individuals. This is a greater level of organization than any government would be able to achieve.

Liberalism would also be an ineffective way to unite people. In practice, people always wish to strive for liberty and equality; however, success of these goals are not always possible (Liberalism lecture). We see this problem in today’s world. The Black Lives Matter movement evolved from the understanding that it is important for people to have equality independently of the color of their skin. While each individual believes this to some extent, individuals that promote this movement are working to reform police action in order to reduce the number of civilian deaths that occur each year. However, when fights for liberty and equality occur, it is typically because the oppressed group has become angered about their inability to obtain rights they deserve. As a result, chaos breaks out both in terms of violence and philosophical debate. On social media, many people are behaving defensively in favor of the cops, showing that cops save lives. On the other hand, supports of the Black Lives Matter movement are angry because such moves detract from their goal. It is clear in this instance, that liberalism is not bringing people together. The existence of a government means that for a country to survive, people need to hold different levels of power. However, it is apparent that when the people with the least power rise up, there is conflict. Thus, liberalism cannot possibly promote the unity of people.

Conservatism is at the other end of the spectrum pertaining to social rights issues, but does not contribute to the likelihood of unity to any great extent (Conservatism lecture). Conservatives tend to remain steadfast with ideals and are unlikely to change their stances or want for any unnecessary action to be taken. As a consequence, this mindset cannot promote unity. Individuals that do want change to make the world a better place would regularly clash with this viewpoint. We can see this happening in modern politics. The Republicans are the conservative party, while Democrats are the liberal party; the Republicans want to keep things the same, while Democrats want change. Because conservatism and liberalism are two extremes, the parties constantly struggle to defend their beliefs and middle grounds often cannot be met. In reality, most people fall somewhere in the middle of conservative and liberal. However, the presence of people in power the believe that points of view can only be one or the other are degrading the ability of the government to make any progress. Thus, it would be beneficial to disband parties altogether, removing the politics involved in such opinions. Doing so would allow people to form their own opinions, whether they are conservative, liberal, or somewhere in the middle. These common interests and understandings will bring together more effectively. Differences would not bring people apart either; since political opinion would no longer have a major stake in arguments, it is reasonable for people to become more accepting of one another.

Last, it is important to avoid Marxism because this philosophy contribute to the atrocities that many people experienced in Soviet Russia (Marxism lecture). The government took advantage of the socialist system in place, keeping a majority of the country’s riches for itself and only distributing a small amount to average citizens. To keep this power, the government killed many directly and let others die of disease and starvation indirectly. It is important to allow people to gain their own finances and resources because this will allow them to promote their own livelihood. Removing the government from this equation makes this process more efficient.

Overall, anarchism is the best method because it truly allows for organization. Bringing people together can only be allowed by giving them the freedom to do as they choose. Government systems create conflict, plunging the world into chaos.