Saturday, Jan. 21, 2017
Anarchy in West VirginiaPosted Saturday, May 9, 2009, at 8:52 PM
The greatest threat to individual freedom is an efficient bureaucracy.
However, government is a necessary evil.
If everyone took responsibility for their own behavior and cooperated on the basis of trust, we would have no need for regulation and oversight. Unfortunately, the human race is imperfect and must enforce a set of reasonable rules to prevent injustice. But the imperfection of the human race often creates a set of unnecessary, unreasonable rules, creating even more injustice.
The only sane option is to limit government as much as possible by ensuring the maximum amount of individual freedom, thereby allowing individuals to do as they please as long as they are not harming others or infringing on the freedom of others.
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republicans whom I can't stand, one nation under smog, indespicable with liberty and justice for some, not all."
The above words were inscribed on one of the T-shirts of 15-year-old Katie Sierra, a student at Sissonville High School in West Virginia. Some of her other T-shirts expressed opposition to the war in Afghanistan and similar perceived injustices. The fact that she was a new student with green hair and the World Trade Center Twin Towers had recently ceased to exist didn't exactly endear her to the rest of the conservative student body.
On October 23, 2001, Katie asked the school principal, Forrest Mann, if she could start an Anarchy Club so like-minded students could meet, have discussions and do community service. She presented Mann with the club Constitution that made it clear the club would not tolerate hate or violence. Her stated goal was "to dispel the myths about anarchism, especially the belief that anarchy is chaos and destruction."
Not too surprisingly, this request was about as welcome as a leaky bag of raw sewage. Not only was Katie forbidden to form an Anarchy Club, she was suspended from school for three days for "disrupting school activity."
Webster's dictionary defines anarchism as "a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups."
In other words, anarchy basically means the absence of government. It's the opposite of hierarchy, which denotes various levels of authority.
The Britannica defines anarchism as "the name given to a principle or theory of life and conduct under which society is conceived without government -- harmony in such a society being obtained, not by submission to law, or by obedience to any authority, but by free agreements concluded between the various groups, territorial and professional, freely constituted for the sake of production and consumption as also for the satisfaction of the infinite variety of needs and aspirations of a civilized being."
There are many people who believe in this way of life. They contend that as both political philosophy and personal lifestyle, social anarchism promotes community self-reliance, direct participation in political decision-making, respect for nature, and nonviolent paths to peace and justice.
The anarchy movement has a long history in certain European countries, particularly in France and Germany.
As with most utopian schemes, it looks good in theory but won't work in reality. I remember back in the 60's and 70's when groups of dissatisfied folks, often called Hippies back then, rejected conventional society and formed communes. Almost every one of these entities failed, usually within a very short time frame.
While being exact opposites, anarchy and communism are almost the same thing.
In communism, everyone is considered equal, required to put forth an equal effort and given an equal amount in return. This would be a perfect world as long as everyone felt the same way. But those who disagree are virtually prisoners of the system, often sent off to a padded cell to be re-educated. Plus those in control of the system can't seem to curtail their greed and provide more for themselves than they allow for the masses.
Anarchy has the same drawback. It only works if everyone agrees with it. A world without government is a world without rules and there will always be those who take improper advantage of it.
Katie Sierra deserved better. She had an unpopular belief system and wanted to share it with others. Instead of allowing a free flow of ideas, her school principal chose to silence her.
America is not a place where the majority rule -- it's where we are all allowed to think and speak freely.
There's nothing wrong with a little government, especially locally. Personally, I like roads.
But if we could somehow reduce the federal government by about 90 percent, that would be fine with me too.
Unfortunately, the new Obama administration believes in promising more than it can deliver and delivering more than it can afford. Borrowing against the future and passing the burden of massive debt onto future generations is not only repugnant, it is immoral.
Quote for the Day -- "The worst thing in this world, next to anarchy, is government." Henry Ward Beecher
Bret Burquest is an award-winning columnist and author of four novels. He lives in the Ozark Mountains with a dog named Buddy Lee and a pack of wild squirrels free from government scrutiny. His blogs appear on several websites, including www.myspace.com/bret1111
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]
Respond to this blog
Posting a comment requires free registration:
Bret Burquest is a former award-winning columnist for The News (2001-2007) and author of four novels. He has lived in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Miami, Atlanta, Kansas City, Memphis and the middle of the Arizona desert. After a life of blood, sweat and tears in big cities, he has finally found peace in northern Arkansas where he grows tomatoes, watches sunsets and occasionally shares the Secrets of the Universe (and beyond) with the rest of the world.