|
What would an anarchist society look like?
So I'm writing a book (i write as a hobby) and I want an anarchy to emerge, so I'm wondering how an anarchy starts, what it would be like living in it (i imagine that total chaos would happen, and the humans would form tribes to live, and fight for power, but if you can show me how some anarchist society's work in real life today, that would be nice) and at some point it's going to end so how would am anarchy end? Thanks.
[ ]
Want to answer more questions in the Miscellaneous category?
Maybe give some free advice about: Doesn't Fit Any Of These Categories?
Anarchy is a really broad term that applies to a bunch of different ways of going about human life. You are going to have to be a little more specific.
Anarchy, at it's most basic, just means no leadership and no government. So there is no centralized political authority.
But other than that, anarchy has operated in vastly, completely different ways. Some of anarchist groups are deeply religious. Others reject religion. Some are even a bit communist in their approach to property ownership and division.
For current anarchist societies, Zomia in Asia is sometimes pointed out, although some scholars do not agree those tribes are in fact, anarchists. There are also a few American anarchist cities which have risen and fallen over the year, Utopia Ohio, Slab City Wisconsin (which still sort of functions, it's an odd case you can look into), Drop City Colorado, and there is Whiteway Colony in the UK.
]
Yes it would almost certainly become tribal/feudal with ad hoc groups forming. And one would dominate eventually and break up the other groups and impose it's own system of government and selected supremos. Most likely it would be dictatorial and military-led since anarchy presumes that control of the armed forces has already slipped away from the previous government/power. Whichever band control the armed services would win eventually, providing another band were not backed by a more powerful regime. In which case they would ultimately be most powerful. It starts when rival factions oppose each other with brute force tactics such that no single regime holds total power. We're really describing civil insurrection, and finding an example of a country which has descended into true anarchy will be very hard in modern history. Although outside observers (or the conutrymen themseleves) may state that a civil war torn country is "in a state of anarchy" during the troubles. Living in it would be pretty horrendous I should think. All the structures, laws and convention of society would break down and become incoherent. We do not fear our armed forces in times of stability. And laws are maintained, with authorised force or the threat of force by police forces. Govenments can be defined as an oligarchy (supreme control rests with a powerful few) or monarchy (a single supreme leader such as a king or emperor) and so on. Anarchy really just means lack of any formal system of control at all. Sorry, I can't give an example of a current country whose declared state is anarchy. Some faction will always either emerge supreme, or there will be a negotiated settlement. I imagine you'd have to look back at the much earlier feudal days of civilisation. And keep in mind that feudal systems worked for many years and were not necessarily anarchic in the true sense. The feudal system emerged out of anarchy and is the basis of nationalism. If the USA were to descend into anarchy the whole two-party system of democracy would have to fail. And not be replaced by any other form of government whatsoever. It's very hard to imagine what life would be like mainly because it's so hard to imagine how it could happen. A contry could be invaded, but the inavding force are ultimately looking to impose their ideology and government on the country, not to leave it in a state of no control. Any faction looking to overthrow the country from within would first have to somehow ensure the cooperation of all the armed forces, and count on them to act against the existing governmnet. Even if they could, the first thing they would do would be to impose their own system of control, and once again the country would no longer be anarchic. Thinking about it, I'm sure you have to look back to cavemen. Where the system would by patriarchy. The father of a family had supreme control over only his own family, which would relatively quickly be expanded to that of a tribal chief or father who has supreme power over only his own tribe. There is no overall control of society. The father rules his family as he wishes, and the tribal chief rules his tribe as he wishes. Neither are beholden to any higher jurisdiction. But how modern society migh somehow regress to this state, I don't know and can't think of a single sufficient cause. Barring perhaps a nuclear apocalypse, which seems rather less likely since the cold-war (Democratic USA/Western alliance in opposition to communist USSR/East European Warsaw Pact) ended. Back then we were fully prepared, and sometimes perilously close, to blowing each other back to the stone age. That would dismantle all the infrastructure we can hardly imagine being without in our world today, and I'd guess the survivors of either side would be ungovernable in any meaningful sense, wouldn't you? Best I can come up with. Good thought-provoking question though. Any good? What do you think it would be like? After a week? A year? Then after 20 years? Food for thought!!
]
More Questions: |