Anti-Statinism is based on the anarchist case against authority. Anarchists believe authority is an offence against the principles of absolute freedom and unrestrained political inequality. Authority is based on political inequality and the right to influence the behaviour of others and limits human life.
A person with high skills and knowledge seems to have adverse authority over people. This is supported by Paul Goodwin ‘many are ruthless and most live in fear.’
Anarchists criticise political authority especially when backed up by the state. In contrast to other ideologies which believe that the state has a worthy function. Like liberals for instance believe that the state promotes and protects the rights of individuals, conservatives believe it is a body for law and order, socialists believe it is the source of social justice. Alternatively anarchists believe that their views are misunderstood as they do not appreciate the destructive and negative forces in the law intuitions of the government. The state is sovereign body that exercises the supreme authority over individuals and associations within defined geographical areas. Anarchists emphasise state authority is unlimited. They reject the liberal notion of political authority arising from voluntary agreement through social contract. They argue that individuals become subject to supreme authority by being born in the country or by request. The state is therefore a coercive body which sets laws for people to obey and enforces the power by punishment and threat. They often argue that the state acts together in alliance with the rich in order to serve the poor.
The anarchist view of human nature is the basis argument against the state. Human beings can either be ‘good or ‘evil’ depending on the social and political circumstances of their environment. If a person is raised above their wealth and others, they will no longer become cooperative but an oppressive tyrant
The state in itself is supreme authority, which is evil.
Natural order
Anarchists believe that the state is evil and not essential. This is justified by William Goodwin’s demonstration of the social contract and the arguments of Hobbes and Locke. They both suggest that a stateless society would lead to a civil war and would not lead to a stable life. Therefore order is impossible without law. Goodwin suggested that humans are rational creatures, inclined by education to live according to moral laws. Therefore he believed that people have a natural propensity to organise their own lives in a peaceful manner.
Anarchists have sympathy for Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s words ‘Man was born free, yet everywhere he is in chains.’
Ashamed utopianism lies at the heart of anarchism whereby there is a belief in the natural goodness of human kind. Forthcoming fro this social order arises naturally not from law and order. This is the reason why anarchist conclusions are based on views on human nature, which are optimistic. An example of this is the collectivist anarchists who emphasise the human mind has a small capacity consisting of social and mutual behaviour, while individualist anarchists draw attention to the importance of progressive human reason.
Anarchists thus, have been attracted to the ideas of non-western religions such as Buddhism and Taoism, which stress interdependence. Nevertheless, anarchism is not wholly based on ‘human goodness’. Firstly anarchist theories are complex on the ideas of human nature. Human beings can be selfish, competitive and as well as cooperative and social. Anarchists secondly have given attention to social institutions as they have human nature. They look upon human nature as ‘plastic’, in a sense that it is shaped by the social, political and economic circumstances within which people live.
Collectivist anarchists support common ownership, while individual anarchists have approved the market. Yet, the belief is stable and peaceful yet stateless society has usually been viewed as the weakest and most contentious aspect of anarchist theory.
Anti-clericalism.
Even though the principle target of anarchism is the state, they apply to any form of authority. They have also expressed the feeling of resentment towards the church like the state. This gives a reason why anarchism has prospered in strong religious countries like Catholic Spain and Italy.
Anarchists object to organised religious that serve to emphasize a range of criticisms of authority in general. Religion is a source of authority whereby the idea of God represents the ‘supreme being’ who has the right to unchallengeable authority. Anarchists like Proudhon and Bakunin, an anarchist political philosophy had to be based upon the rejection of Christianity because only then could human beings be regarded as free and independent. They suspect that both political and religious authority work normally work hand in hand. Bakunin declared that ‘ The abolition of the Church and State must be first and indispensable condition of the true liberation of society’. Anarchists view religion as one of the pillars of the state and it puts forward an obedience ideology to earthy rulers and spiritual leaders. As the bible declares,’ give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s’.
In conclusion to religion, which seeks to impose a set of moral principles upon the individual and to achieve an acceptable code of conduct. Belief in religion needs traditionalism to standards of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ which are defined and policed by figures of religious authority such as priests and bishops. The individual is thus robbed of individual sovereignty and the initiative to make judgements on ethical issues. Anarchists do not reject religion and it’s impulses altogether. Anarchists hold the necessary spiritual concept of human nature. This is a utopian belief in the virtually unlimited possibilities of human self-development and in the bonds that unite humanity and all living things.
Early anarchists have been influenced by millenarianism, a belief in the return of Christ and the development of the kingdom of God while modern anarchists have been attracted to religions such as Taoism and Zen Buddhism which preach values like toleration, natural harmony and respect.
Economic freedom
Anarchists are interested in testing the social and economic structure of life. Bakunin argued that ‘political power and wealth are inseparable’. Throughout the 19th century, anarchists worked within the working-class movement and imbued to the socialist social philosophy. Capitalism was a misunderstood in terms of class, whereby the ruling class exploits and oppresses ‘the masses’. In narrow and economic terms ‘ruling class’ is not in line with Marxism, but is seen to encompass all those who command power, wealth and privilege. Therefore Bakunin stressed that in every developed society there are 3 social groups: a vast majority who are exploited, a minority who are exploited but always exploit others and the supreme governing estate.
Therefore anarchists classify themselves with the poor and oppressed and are required to carry out a social revolution in the name of ‘exploited masses’ in which both capitalism and state have been swept away.
Nevertheless, the tensions within anarchism are exposed by the economic structure of life. Many anarchists acknowledge a connection with socialism, based on inequality and common dislike for property. Both factions of anarchist traditions, which are individualist and collectivist, have distinguished difference based on economy. Individual anarchists support the market and private economy while collectivist anarchists advocate economy based upon cooperation and collective ownership. Despite this difference, anarchists agree about their distaste for economic systems.
All anarchists oppose ‘ managed capitalism’ that flourished in western countries after 1945.
Collective groups argue that state intervention leads to exploitation gives capitalism a human face, while individual anarchists suggest that state intervention creates an economies dominated by both private and public monopolies.
Anarchism has been united due to their rejection of soviet-style ‘state socialism’. Individuals argue for a planned economy due to their rejection to the violation of property rights and individual freedom. On the other hand collectivist argue that ‘state socialism’ is a negation as it replaces the capitalist class as the main source of exploitation.
All kinds of anarchists have an economic preference in which free individuals deal with their own affairs without state ownership. Nevertheless, this has permitted them to approve a variety of diverse economic systems.
