One thing that scares many people away from anarchism is crime. They fear that crime would be rampant without government to keep it in check. Let's think about that for a minute.
Ignore for a moment the vast numbers of crimes that are committed or enabled by government at some level. Does crime still exist in our current society "in spite of" government? Do you believe that there is less crime because of government? If so, why do you hold that belief? Are you certain it isn't just because you have been told that it is so your whole life? If there really is less crime under a government, why might that be? Is it the criminals' fear of being caught and punished? Is it fear of the enforcers; fear that the enforcers might shoot them while apprehending them?
What about "crimes" that only exist because government criminalizes normal (or even abnormal) human behaviors that have no victim? That adds greatly to the amount of "crime" that is perceived.
If the fear of being caught, punished, or shot decreases the incidence of crime, that raises more questions. Do you think that only government-hired enforcers can handle real criminals? Why? Training? Superior moral character? (cough) You do realize that stopping crime is your responsibility, don't you? Why do you shirk your responsibility and try to say someone else should do it in your place? You can hide behind the enforcers and the government, but that doesn't remove or fulfil your responsibility in any way. It only causes more problems by establishing an "enforcer class" that feels that it owns you because you are running from your responsibility.
A free society would be more than able to deal with crime, without the side effects that abdicating your personal responsibility gives birth to. Think about it.
___________________________
That's a tough one. I'd like to think that tougher laws and real consequences would deter criminals, but there is still the question of who would be responsible for administering the punishment, and how they are qualified to do so.
ReplyDeleteFor real, though....we need to eradicate all stupid and useless laws. Every local branch of government seems to have at least one bizarre 'law' that isn't worth the time and effort of punishment, if the infraction is punished at all. Of course, my definition of stupid and yours might differ.
It's a shame most people can't behave themselves responsibly, negating the need for punishable laws and ultimately negating the need for a government at all. But I doubt it will ever happen.
(I'm having trouble making the links work out right....)
ReplyDeleteDSB - You might be interested in this article (which I found, thanks to ).
The exerpt that Francois highlighted is very thought-provoking:
"The anarchist sees crime as inevitable; there are, unfortunately a few deviants who do not care about harming others, or, worse yet, even enjoy harming others. So the anarchist accepts this reality. It is a fact of life. All he can do is try to minimize the risk to himself or to those he cares about. But the person with Utopian thinking, on the other hand, is unable to accept this reality. He continues to grasp at the illusion that crime might be eliminated if only a suitable agency can be formed. He is oblivious to the fact that any agency powerful enough to stand up to the strongest evil is also strong enough to become the strongest evil. It remains only for the criminals to seize control of this agency. He is also oblivious to the fact that by attempting to preemptively stop crime he creates the very societal conditions which allow it to flourish: fear, mistrust, division."