An interesting critique of anarchism. It’s important for ideologues and ideological writers to fairly acknowledge or confront weaknesses in their own positions.
Btw. TheRightStuff.Biz has a lot of interested, irreverent commentary that’s well worth checking out.
Let’s talk about anarchy for a moment. Which kind of anarchy? Anarcho-capitalism? Anarcho-syndicalism? Anarcho-primitivism? Anarcho-communism? Anarcha-feminism? Gee wilikers, there sure are a buttload of reasons to get rid of the state, huh? Apparently, getting rid of the state will lead to a completely free, environmentally sustainable, feminist, worker-controlled, capitalistic, tribal (yet advanced), communistic land that will organize itself quite nicely. After all, what good does the state ever do? It taxes you (murderously rapes you with a gun to your head), enforces property rights (rapes and steals from you with a gun to your head), enforces a system of capitalistic exploitation (forces you into slavery with a gun to your head), and forces business owners to work within a specific market frame (steals, rapes, and exploits them with a gun to their head).
Anarchists can’t really agree on who the state is raping or what it is stealing most of the time, but they all agree that it IS raping and stealing. (and murdering!) Well gosh, we certainly are civilized enough by this time to interact with one another without all of this raping, right? We should just get rid of the state! Peace and love! The state is a power structure, built on primal greed and power-lust! Look at all the suffering it causes! All the exploitation! I am unable to enact my own will in the face of such tyranny! We’re all victims, and only I am intelligent enough to see it! Wait… this is sounding familiar.
The political simpleton is not limited to “anarchy.” There is a political formula followed by all political simpletons. It follows as such:
- I/we am/are (a) victim(s).
- I/we am/are too weak to enact my/our will alone.
- X is my oppressor(s). Without X, my/our will shall be enacted.
- Different opinions are immoral.
The only difference between feminism, anarchy, stormfront nationalism or cultural liberalism is which direction the tears are flowing. In other words, there is no difference. Shouting “NAP” is the equivalent of shouting “patriarchy.” It’s all about fighting the violence and rape, because you’re just such a spechul snowflake. Stick a Voluntaryist in a room full of Marx, or a Marxist in a room full of Rothbard, and give it a few days. They’ll have a whole new rapist to deal with. Yes, I’m afraid your political views are about as interesting as the child babble overheard at slutwalks.
When speaking to political simpletons, each has a narrative rehearsed and prepared about theft and rape, and they actually believe they are being profound. You can point out the obvious absurdities and problems with the “solutions” (problems) provided by anarchists, feminists, etc. but it will only be met with condemnation, snarky remarks and holier-than-thou rhetoric. Nation-wide market-run roads unrealistic in their so-called efficiency? A lack of defined law leading to instability? Fantasy-politics being shot down? Just shout “NAP” and tell them you don’t support rape. You are morally in the right, after all.
The reason nobody is taking your victimhood seriously isn’t because your Facebook status isn’t being read enough. It’s not because people are being brainwashed by popular media. It’s not because people are afraid. It’s not because they haven’t read enough of your library. It’s because you are an insufferable simpleton, and your political views are childish. Come join the rest of us statists when your body is ready.