Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 24, No. 12. 1961.

The Argument Against Anarchy — Doublethink?

The Argument Against Anarchy

Doublethink?

With the advent of an Anarchist Association in the University, let us examine the anarchist theory. At the outset, let me say that, in theory, Anarchy is Arguable.. But in Practice it is Unworkable. As Thomas says in his book "Spanish Civil War"—in his total pacifism and goodwill to all, the anarchist becomes the murderer; politics being the art of the possible, politics is impossible to the quixotic impossibilists and madmen of the anarchist left.

Ignoring their sparse numbers, let us examine their theory. They say that the government is unnecessary — that mutual aid and human goodwill will automatically ensure a stable society. A non-money economy has as its condition full production (on anarchist terms) so that this immediately raises an objection. We will need to have some form of governing body to equate money to production, which is sensible in itself but, the anarchist will have nothing to do with a ruling body and it would appear that a socialist stage is necessary We have seen that the socialist stage in the shabby "people's democracies" has resulted in State capitalism. Even disregarding the possibility of a repetition of the story of the Soviet Union, the anarchist finds himself in a predicament.

The anarchist would have us believe that the nation state, its administrative bodies and free enterprises constitute a threat to the integrity and morals of the human race; that freed from these, man will live in perfect harmony with his neighbour. Pacifism is a sane attitude, but it is a tenable position at present (it is only a matter of time before it is respected by the majority) and that it is not necessary to discard our society and adopt some airy-fairy notion of the extreme left.

In formulating this perfect state in his mental and intellectual wanderings, the anarchist neglects to consider the inherent weaknesses of man — jealousy, greed, meglomania — or if he does consider them in his plan of better things to come, by some strange reasoning comes to the conclusion that suddenly, on the advent of a true anarchist society, man will realise that there are greater things above materialism and greed and that we will be justified in calling our neighbours "comrade." Another objection: How is this pacifist society going to deter any group trying to assert its power over the others?

It will be interesting to hear from the promoters of this scheme of madmen and dreamers, slogans and double-think of a moral gymnasium, convert us over to their common front.

"Future Capitalist."?