Have you ever thought that anarchy means chaos? If your answer is duh, obvious you nimrod, then good that is just one definition. Anarchy doesn’t just mean chaos, it can also mean no rulers. In this post, I want to present an abstract argument for Anarchy using Charles Darwin’s theories of evolution. However, before I start I want to set perimeters on the exact scope of what I’m talking about. The main point that I want to convey is that Anarchy operates in the same way as Darwinism. Anarchy as a form of rule uses the principles put forth in Darwinism to help guide how society should be. I will also address some of the criticisms of Anarchy which are actually based on the definition of chaos. If you don’t know who Charles Darwin is or what his theories here is a link to explain it.
Correlation of Chaos and Survival
Everyone has heard of “survival of the fittest”, a fairly common nearly cliche phrase. It is usually used to describe a situation where the “strongest” will be the ones to keep going. Chaos is a familiar everyday term to describe things being out of control in some context. Now you have to wonder how these two might be correlated? It would seem that on the surface these phrases have nothing to do with each other. However, if each is taken in a certain context you can see that actually they play off each other quite nicely. For example, in nature, lets say in the jungle you have chaos because there is no government or any sort of higher order. At the same time, you have a natural hierarchy, of predators and prey that create our phrase “survival of the fittest”. The jungle is a good example of how survival of fittest relates to chaos. When you imagine it as jungle really brings together the terms nicely. Now let’s take this one step further.
Theories of Evolution and No Rulers
Darwin saw while on his explorations that species would evolve and adapt to changes in their environments. I think that evolving and adapting are also important to understand in Anarchy. The theory of Anarchy is that there is no need for no rulers. In other words, its self rule or self government. Anarchy is the foremost form of individualism. Now if you combine what Darwin identified as key to life on earth and a form of individualism (Anarchy) then you get a uniquely natural hierarchy of rules. Now just because Anarchy means no rulers doesn’t mean there isn’t rules. Anarchy is too broad of a term that is why I brought in individualism. This suggests that individuals are self rulers with rights. Natural rights are a part of Anarchy. Individuals must adapt and evolve their behaviors to keep from rights infringement. Now we see it coming together. The survival of the fittest will naturally follow the natural rights, not infringe on others, and adapt to the changes that occur in daily life. Anarchy can easily be molded in any shape it needs because each individual has the ability to adjust as necessary. As long as the right infringement is kept in check by private property, guns and NAP then Anarchy is flexible.
Criticism of Anarchy
One popular criticism of Anarchy that I see everywhere is that Anarchy means chaos, meaning one could do whatever the hell they want. This is by no means what Anarchy means. Like I have just explain Anarchy rest on individual rights. These rights cannot be infringed. If they are the survival of fittest will decide, in other words, whoever is better equipped to handle these violations. There is also an element of voluntary actions. This leads to another criticism, although more of a strawman. Typically the critic will say “Ok but what if a violent contingent of crazies moves into your neighborhood and violates your rights constantly.” This argument is nonsense. First, its in anarchy its a voluntary movement and its not like everyone has to participate. There will always other collectivist nations and violent states for people like. Secondly, even if that did happen, you don’t think Anarchist are armed to teeth? You will be very sorry to mess with us. This strawman argument also forgets to account for the Darwinism inherently built into Anarchy. The survival of fittest is the rule of law in society, each individual has their rights and cannot be infringed without consequences. Individuals that live like this will be evolved and adapted to infringement.
Conclusion
Darwinism and Anarchy go hand in hand. Without one you couldn’t possibly have the other. Anarchy operates on the principle of Darwinism. It depends on the natural course of things to help keep individuals in check. I strongly believe that collectivism is unnatural to nature. Animals do collectivize in a sense of packs or herds, yes. However, there is no government forcing them, its just each individual following the rules and norms of the herd and pack. It always amazes me that people are tricked by a lifetime under oppressive government rule that its only the way to run a society. I think as a society we have a long way to go. We need to understand the basics of human nature. Greed and self interest run the human psychology. Once you understand this, then add in Darwinism and basic supply and demand economics you can start to fathom how Anarchy might be the best possible version of society.
Thanks for reading! Have an amazing day!
My Social Media:
Twitter @gpslife12
Facebook: Garrett’s Life Experience’s Blog
Technically Analytics 