Anarchism isn't a Utopian ideal, but rather the recognition that society functions in spite of government rather than because of government. Government claims responsibility for society's successes while blaming liberty for governmental failures. After all, government is just a group of people who claim a territorial monopoly in violence, and monopolies invariably promote waste and abuse. The record of wars, police states, arbitrary prohibitions, confiscatory taxation, failed centrally-planned economies, and other disasters of recorded history all fall at the feet of governments, not liberty.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think wanting to implement a society with 0 government is a utopian ideal. I have no doubt society would function without a government but it doesn't mean most people would be better off. I agree with everything bad you say about government but it's easy to lay the blame for everything at the feet of government because in all of recorded history government has always been there (with a few very limited exceptions). However, the problem is with people and those problems won't go away just because you take away government. They will just take a different form. There will still be groups of people claiming territorial monopoly in violence or at least there's no reason to believe there won't be. I am not convinced that quality of life would generally be better if government just went away. Government has generally been reformed for the better throughout the ages. There's no particular reason to think that can't continue though it has certainly been a while.
Government has way too much power and I am all for reducing it at every possible turn. I just don't think the complete absence of government in the long run would ultimately be better.