Anarchy is Preferable to Totalitarianism

Intro Anarchy refers to a society without a publicly enforced government which advocates a stateless society based on voluntary associations. Although there are many sects of anarchy, I will be arguing in favor of anarchy in general, focusing on its common traits such as the lack of public authority, promotion of personal autonomy, and the non-aggression principle. Personal Autonomy Anarchism envisages society as an ideal form of personal autonomy. John Locke believed that all men have three natural rights: The right to life, liberty, and property. In general, anarchy operates off of the basic idea that all men share these rights, save for the right to property which may vary among different sects of anarchy. Although anarchy promotes these rights, it specifically focuses on the right to liberty. It is important to note that men only have the right to liberty insofar as they do not impede on others’ rights. This is a basic tenet of anarchy known as the non-aggression principle which will be addressed later. The right to liberty is important because personal autonomy is what makes human beings distinct, moral, and valuable individuals. Distinct in that our free decisions indicate our personal thoughts, feelings, and preferences, and our decisions create the path in which we walk our life. This allows humans to pursue distinct individuality, which is important to the social, economic, technological, and moral development of society. Moral creatures in that ethics is very much based on the intent of the actions we do and the means in which we do it. A forced action does not reflect on the morality of the agent because that agent did not freely choose to commit said action. Valuable in that each free decision allows an individual to better himself and his society as he can best do and as he sees fit. In conclusion, personal autonomy makes human beings, human beings: valuable, individual, and moral agents. Non-Aggression Principle The Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) is a moral stance which asserts that initiated aggression against a person’s rights is illegitimate. Aggression is only justified when it is used as a means of defending one’s rights. NAP specifically refers to our right to personal autonomy and self determination. The NAP is the guiding moral code of anarchy. NAP is an important moral code because it distinguishes civilized anarchy from the idea of anarchy as economic and social chaos. If the NAP is followed then an anarchic society may flourish. The society would allow full personal autonomy, and thus the humanization of its citizens. Anarchy along with the moral code of NAP allows for persons to be respected as individual, independent, moral, and valuable human beings. In other words, humans can be treated as, “adults,” as opposed to the totalitarian idea that citizens are incapable of taking care of themselves and making their own decisions. If NAP is not followed, citizens have the moral right to punish those who violate others rights. It is important to note that although NAP is the guiding moral rule of libertarianism, it is not necessarily the only moral rule. NAP has a special attachment to libertarian philosophy, and thus it is important that it be covered for the sake of this debate. Authority is Unnecessary Authority is defined as, “The power to enforce laws, exact obedience, command, determine, or judge.” [1] The realization of authority operates under the principle that by controlling the freedom of others, certain ends can be met or avoided. Punishments are dispensed to unwanted actions as a means of controlling actions. There are two problems with authority: 1. Who determines which actions are unwanted, and how are unwanted actions determined? Political theories such as democracy and republicanism allow for individual control and consent over such matters. How does this question apply to Totalitarianism though? In a totalitarian state, citizens do not consent to created laws nor do they participate in the creation of such laws. This leaves great potential for the abuse of authority, as totalitarian states had a tendency toward throughout history. [2][3] The problem lies in the idea that Totalitarian leaders are superior to citizens, and thus they should have the ability to control the lives of citizens. This supposed superiority however, is for the most part, unfounded and imaginary. Without this superiority then, totalitarian dictators are just as fallible as other humans. To put a fallible person in a position of such immense power thus jeopardizes the overall well being of society. 2. Individuals can create the same results law does without public enforcement If any social institution is important enough to societal and individual well being, there is no reason to believe man will not take the effort to establish it of his own will. Government is thus unnecessary, for any institution important to society that government enforces, man will also institute regardless of government enforcement. Any institution that is deemed unimportant to man that the government enforces is unjustified because it infringes on man’s right to liberty. The Inherent Problems of Totalitarianism Greater Possibility of Abuse and Greater Negative Effects from Abuse As mentioned earlier in Authority is Unnecessary, by placing a fallible being in a position of immense power, it is likely that this power will be abused. Citizens do not control law and enforcement and thus the Totalitarian elite can very easily create unjust and abusive laws. If citizens refuse to follow these laws, Totalitarian states use great force to destroy all opposition. The only option then is to go to war and overthrow the Totalitarian elite. It is therefore no surprise that Totalitarian states like the USSR under Stalin killed as many as 60,000,000 people and Nazi Germany killed upwards towards 21,000,000 people. [4][5] In contrast, since anarchy lacks an established authority, it is unlikely that people will be overpowered and abused. Provided NAP is followed accordingly, such a problem would never exist at all. Totalitarianism Undermines Individuality Individuality allows for the possibility of political, technological, and moral progress. Abiding by social norms halts individuality. Progression comes from “thinking outside of the box.” Totalitarian governments control every aspect of an individual, and originality and creativity are outlawed on the principle that this allows citizens to escape what the government deems to be “the right way to live.” Totalitarian fascist Benito Mussolini stated, “Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." Totalitarian governments force all people to abide by X, and to fail to abide by X results in punishment. By constricting all people to follow a certain lifestyle, originality and creativity are destroyed, and thus the possibility of progression is halted. Totalitarianism Undermines Humans as Independent, Individually Valuable, and Moral Agents This argument is simply the inverse of my argument in Personal Autonomy. In Personal Autonomy I stated that self determination allows humans to be independent, valuable, and moral agents. Since totalitarianism is the complete control over an individual’s liberty, the pursuit of independence, individual value, and the ability to make significant moral decisions is therefore impeded. [1]https://dictionary.search.yahoo.com...= [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org... [4]http://www.ibtimes.com... [5] http://www.scottmanning.com...