Posted on 04/16/2003 9:57:04 PM PDT by Maedhros
Stealing beauty
Word of the week: Anarchy
Stephen Moss
Wednesday April 16, 2003
The Guardian
On the face of it, the events of the past week have not been a great advertisement for anarchy. Or for civilisation for that matter. At 7,000 years old, Iraq is just about the world's most venerable country, yet the minute Saddam's foot is off his people's neck they're out pinching heart monitors and Greek statues.
If this happened in Washington, Donald Rumsfeld would be the first to condemn it, but the US defence secretary was understanding. "Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things," he said. He also accused the media of exaggeration. "It's the same picture of some person walking out of some building with a vase," he complained. It was probably a priceless, 24th-century BC fruit bowl, but tell it to the marines.
Rumsfeld's intervention suggests that what was on the surface a disaster for "anarchism" may in fact mark its rebirth. Anarchy was always preferable to tyranny, he insisted. Here, the BBC's man in Baghdad, Andrew al-Gilligan, was attacked for saying that "one of the great things about dictatorships is that they are efficiently run". Commuters waiting for the late-running 7.36 to Torino central may be getting agitated, countered his critics, but it doesn't mean they hanker after the return of Mussolini.
Rumsfeld's words provide a boost for a movement that has suffered calamitous decline in the past hundred years. In the 19th century, anarchism vied with socialism and communism, but anarchists were by definition terrible organisers and had little chance against the five-year planners. Now, though, with the collapse of the Soviet state, the growth of the anti-globalisation movement and support in the US administration, it is ready to stage a comeback.
The semantics have always been fluid. The derivation is Greek (an + arkhe) and means absence of authority. The Stoic philosopher Zeno, who opposed Plato's championing of the state, has claims to be the first anarchist. The cause wasn't helped, however, by the fact that Zeno's teachings were handed down only in fragments - a typically anarchic approach.
"Anarchy" thereafter had a bad press - it was defined by the centralising Tudors as "the unlawful liberty or licence of the multitude". "Anarchism", which adherents insist is not about the promotion of anarchy but the pursuit of harmony, fared better. In the English civil war, it signified chaos and destruction - the first usage listed by the OED dates from 1642. But a century later, William Godwin redefined it. "Government," he said, "was intended to suppress injustice, but it offers new occasions and temptations for the commission of it."
Anarchism's great age was the 19th century, with Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin developing its philosophical tradition. Though eventually outgunned by Marxism, it was always strong in the libertarian US and now along comes Red Rummy, giving new meaning to "property is theft".
· Note: Much of this material has been stolen from anarchist websites, but I assume they would never sue.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003
Pure anarchy is probably unsustainable over the long term, though there have been some societies that made a go of it for a while. The most notable one was medieval Iceland, which had no State of any kind for four hundred years -- an era brought to its end by its assimilation by Denmark.
But topical anarchy -- the restriction of government power to a few, well defined areas where common norms must be enforced for society to survive -- is just Constitutionalism by another name.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.