Anarchy had always seemed like such a fringe and radical ideology that I never delved further into because it had been presented as an unruly and extremist way of thought. What I now realize is that those defining it as a negative impact on society that wants to burn everything and live in chaos, were themselves extremists but of the conservative kind. Even in political science, this topic was never a subject of discussion and it was because it would anarchy seeks to transform politics and the power structure which is antithetical to a highly structured and orderly government that political science is founded in.
The simple definition of anarchy is without a ruler or authority.
I have since learned that I am an anarchist and never even knew it. Before you think I have a Molotov cocktail in my hand ready to light it up and toss it on the establishment, that’s not what I advocate or does anarchism. It is a very broad ideal and contains many different schools of thought within it. One central point to anarchy is the rejection of the state. Instead of the state, the people should make decisions. Anarchy does not promote violence but an end to centralized control of the people and the oppression of the state over the people. Anarchists support non-coercive authority over coercive authority. They still support a society, just one that is unoppressed. It’s a society where the people lead and work together.
Surprise! Not all anarchists are against government. As long as it is decentralized, minimal, progressive, and non-coercive, these are the conditions that an anarchist approves and champions in governments. Yes, the state would be nonexistent, but in its place there would be local representative groups that assist people in their region, and would work with other representative groups outside their region as well. Those who want to participate in a role within these representative groups would do so without pay as a volunteer position only. I’d add that there be a swift process to remove these people if they then distort their position for one of power.
To the anarchist, the state has way too much power over you because the state can send you to prison for your lifetime, removes children from their families, tortures their own citizens, and can expel you from your country. The state does have too much control.
There are many types of anarchists and not all agree with each other. For example, I would disagree with a libertarian anarchist that supports capitalist markets because, to me, capitalism is a form of extreme coercive control and oppression but to a libertarian anarchist they see capitalism as a societal need.
The four essential features of anarchism are:
Self-regulation
Freedom to choose
Decentralisation
De-powerment (power not going to one person, group, or institution)
The focus is on cooperation between everyone listening to each other and respecting each other. In an anarchist society, it’s not about chaos, but communicating with one another and mediating our differences in a peaceful manner to resolve conflicts.
Why has anarchy such a bad connotation to it? Because it threatens the state and those who benefit from having the state in existence. The rich and powerful are in charge and do not want to lose that power so it is better to frame anarchists as extremists when they simply have a different perspective of the power structure than what benefits the rich and powerful.
Articles to read more about anarchy:
The Idea of Anarchy by Doug Magendanz
Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you! by David Graeber
The philosophy of anarchism explained by Sean Illing
Anarchy: A Definition by Stuart Christie
Anarchy: Definition, Types, Schools of Thought by Will Kenton