Anar-what?
The other day, I was talking to a 15 year old punk kid who was ranting and raving about anarchy. When I asked him what he thought anarchy was, he gave me the run of the mill “no government/total freedom” answer. He was deadest in the theory that the world should convert to this great system of anarchy, yet he couldn’t back up his battle cry. I told this aspiring revolutionary that violence and criminal activity would skyrocket if there were no law enforcement. It would be a dangerous, primitive society. The boy then claimed that could be solved with global disarmament. “We can all rise up against the weapons manufacturers and shut ‘em down!” he exclaimed. Now, anyone with a halfway operative brain can see that this act would clearly be a form of government (not to mention it wouldn’t really dent the increase of violence that would occur), thus shattering this concept to which our little buddy clings so blindly. When I informed him of this fact, he said, “No man, we don’t need the government to shut them down! We’ll do it!” He just didn’t understand that controlling something, no matter who does it or why, is not absolute freedom, and thus not anarchy by that definition. I wish that when people claim to be something as radical as an anarchist, they knew what it really was. I’ve got no problem with anarchists as long as they understand what it’s about and aren’t just using it for fashion so they can sew those neat little “A” patches onto their stuff.
