Comparison between Anarchism and Liberalism - Coursework Example

ANARCHISM AND LIBERALISM By and Comparison between Anarchism and Liberalism Anarchism and Liberalism ideologies present different ways of looking at problems and different ways of fixing them in order to benefit the society. This essay is aimed at comparing the main ideological differences between the two while arguing how effectively each ideology would be if implemented in today’s society. Anarchism presents good ideas on how a society would function without a centralized form of governance or any modern institution although the biggest drawback they face is that they lack clear definition and explanations of how that could be achieved in a real world situation. On the other hand, contemporary liberals believe that a government is the main stronghold. Although the ideology is effective, the overdependence on a government causes them to lose a chance of running a reliable democratic state. The two ideologies present a strong argument that is acceptable on paper but when they could not be implemented in today’s society due to individual influences and alternative conception. Anarchism’s main ideology is that a society can effectively sustain itself in a free community that lacks any form of authority. Anarchists view liberalism as an organization that is established to create liberty for the wealth while enslaving the masses. According to Emma Goldman’s (2008) description of anarchism, liberalism and anarchism are linked in that anarchism is based on liberty that is unrestricted by any form of man-made laws.1 Anarchists believe that a government creates a form of competitiveness for power that results in social disorder and thus moral depravity therefore, when a government is abolished, people will join hands in a community based on communal aid and understanding without a centralized form of authority. In contrast, liberalism is the exact opposite because the main ideology behind it is the classical liberal’s idea concerning economic, political and social liberties while using the government as the main tool for achieving the goal. Liberalism looks at the government as the main solution to the failure of capitalism.2 Based on Kropotkin’s (1955) argument, 67 percent of acts that are brought in court each year have direct or indirect origin to the distribution of wealth in the society thus the idea of liberalism is described as a failure.3 This can be interpreted to means that because liberalism creates social classes thus un-wealth people end up committing crimes since they need to fulfill their basic needs which were denied to them by the uneven distribution of wealth. Considering a case where a mother of three children lacks an option other than to steal food for her family.4 Liberals argue that she is a criminal because she could have consulted with the government to receive aid that would benefit her and her children while the anarchist would argue that if there lacked any form of government in the first place, she could not have been driven into her current situation since wealth would have mutually and evenly distributed throughout the society thus arguing that the struggle resulting from the formation of a government only results to chaos and disorder than if no form of authority existed.5 Liberals see the government authority as a control that sets laws for the protection of the society against themselves by safeguarding the liberals. Although this argument can be accepted anarchists argue that government authorities can be corrupted under certain leaders and hence the government authority can be manipulated to achieve personal gain since the position becomes the authority of whoever controls the government thus lacking to protect the liberty of the society.6 Anarchists continue to argue that laws are the main cause of the demoralization of the society because people only follow them in the fear of being caught rather than for the benefit of the society.7 This can lead to crime when a person feels that he can get away with infringing on a person’s liberty thus lacking any sense of moral judgment. Paul Wolff support anarchist argument by adding that the government cannot make laws that can fit all the morals and standards of the people thus the people have to surrender their liberty. Liberals believe that the government should expand its authoritative laws to aid in the growth of the economy and increasing the people liberty by creating means of discovering the people’s needs through scientific research8. This means that the government has to find out the problems that result to blockage of liberal goals thus the government creates a large framework of laws, programs and conditions to force the society into a controlled environment in order to stop the problems. On the other hand, anarchists see this solution as insatiable since they do not solve the problems but go around them in a controlled manner they argue that the more laws only inhibit the liberties of the people and if the government was stripped off the people would mutually aid each other leading to a uniform growth of the economy.9 The two ideologies have a common flaw in their ideology which is that they both their reasoning in the faith in human beings. Anarchism is dependent on humans in that they base their arguments on the capability of humans to settle and provide mutual aid while liberalism depends on the morality of a capitalist society and its ability to aid the less fortunate. The anarchists theory is dependent on humans having intrinsic mutual aid and the liberals are dependent on the morals of capitalist society and the ability of it to want to help the less fortunate. They flaw, on the anarchists side, comes to light when we consider that there will never lack people who are self-centered and would want to dominate and there will also be people who are willing to follow them. 10 Liberals see a necessity and continuously advocate for a representative. They are aware that power in unevenly distributed mostly due to the existence of minority groups and advocate for a solution by proposing that more interest groups should be developed. Anarchist solve the same problem by arguing that decision making would involve the entire community thus no group would feel left out. Anarchists debate that democracy has two features that are a threat to individual rights which are majority rule meaning that the minority are oppressed and representative governments that are unable to cover everyone’s point of view in a matter.11 Anarchists argue that humans have a distinctive capability to reason and learn and that they are sociable beings that need the company of other beings to feel complete. Based on these, the feasibility of an anarchist society can be developed. Anarchists believe that the innate ability of humans to think for themselves inevitably makes any forms of hierarchy illegitimate thus humans can organize themselves without the need for a government due to the need of building social relationships.12 They continue that the domination and authoritarianism of a liberal society denies humans some innate needs thus leading to deep unhappiness and alienation that is afflicting the modern society today. They debate that for the great majority of their existence, humans have lived in anarchic societies thus is people are born into an anarchic society with no external pressure they are inevitable going to cooperate and adapt thus helping the society in any way they can. Liberals on the other hand believe that humans poses an insatiable need to obtain wealth and anything that will facilitate to a better life thus they will work tirelessly to get their hands on the good things in life which may be different from one individual to another based on a what a person perceives as a good life.13 Liberalism in a way supports the anarchist view concerning human nature when they argue that if a person is born in an anarchical community he would be molded by that society thus poses the same needs as the society and if born in a liberal community the same would happen meaning that the sole reason why democracy and capitalism function in today’s society is due to the fact that everyone was born and taught that is works.14 Essentially, the anarchists spearhead and work on ensuring that the society has a chain of good leaders both politically and socially. The core goal is to gain oversight and popularity. They remain at the entire ladder of power rank impeding the promotion of other leaders at all. Most significantly, the libertarians have a core duty in promoting voluntary human interactions, regarding them as crucial and as being the foundation of moral upbringing in the society. Libertarianism, however, focus on liberating people from society authority, while anarchism liberates people from political authority. References Barsky, R. (2007). People are dangerous. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. De Cock, C. and Bohm, S. (2007). Liberalist Fantasies: Zizek and the Impossibility of the Open Society. Organization, 14(6), pp.815-836. Goldman, E. (2008). Anarchism and other essays. [Auckland, N.Z.]: Floating Press. Kelly, P. (2005). Liberalism. Cambridge: Polity. Kropotkin, P. and Huxley, T. (1955). Mutual aid, a factor of evolution. Boston: Extending Horizons Books. Nyawasha, T. (2013). Two Cheers for Anarchism. Symbolic Interaction, 36(3), pp.377-379. The politics of individualism: liberalism, liberal feminism and anarchism. (1995). Choice Reviews Online, 32(05), pp.32-2995-32-2995. Thompson, S. (2002). INTRODUCTION TO POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES. [online] Kilyos.ee.bilkent.edu.tr. Available at: http://kilyos.ee.bilkent.edu.tr/~ge301/polideologies.txt [Accessed 10 Jan. 2015]. Vallentyne, P. and van der Vossen, B. (2002). Libertarianism. [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/ [Accessed 10 Jan. 2015]. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(02), Read More