Anarchy, in Sid Meyer’s Civilization video game series, is a state of upheaval where government is temporarily unable to provide cities with logistical bonuses. Although the absence of government is the most common meaning given for Anarchy, there are others.
“Anarchy is the natural state without the modernized cultural spin. It is what we truly are and how we actually behave . . . anarchy is human nature.” ~ Rachel Haywire — Attack The System dot com
Pure Anarchy, here, is a universal force embedded in human nature which rejects coercive social pressures. It is not only a force, but a primordial state existing outside of culture. It is the idealized individuality of the motherless Padmasambhava.
The common definition of Anarchy gives way to the stereotypical Anarchist bomber who simply wants to create a lapse in government through violence. Of course, like most people, very few Anarchists are violent. Not only that, but there is disagreement about which kinds of governance are benign and which must be abolished. Left-Anarchists may see Capitalist power as the primary coercive force, whereas Anarcho-Capitalists see Democracy as the major offender. In either case, both sides acknowledge the necessity of one flavor of coercion or another, in order to reach a maximized state of liberty. These kinds of Anarchists regularly use coercion, such as transgressive speech acts or traffic disruptions, in an attempt to decrease the sum total of coercion.
[pullquote]”The heavens and the earth are not partial to institutionalized morality.” ~ Lau Tzu — Dao De Jing[/pullquote]Existence as a social animal implies coercion. Seemingly, the only way to escape the social situation is death or exile, and moral codes founded on non-coercion quickly become a platform for coercion. This Pure Anarchy is not an end that can be attained through sustained effort but rather an ideal means. To be an Anarchist, in this sense, is profound way-making, nothing short of enlightenment.
[pullquote]”The ends justify the means.” ~ Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli[/pullquote]Anarchocrats, a purposefully derisive neologism, are Anarchists with an endgame. These are the mad bombers, the Left-Anarchist communal ideologues, and the Anarcho-Capitalist profit-utopians. Anarchocrats are instrumentalists; they believe ideology can only succeed when coercively imposed on the whole of society. Then the sheeple will see the light! Only the Anarchocrats are trying to coerce people into non-coercion, something has short-circuited, and somehow through some bizarre self-deception they’ve convinced themselves this could possibly work. If only they got more people on the streets shouting, if only somehow conditions got worse! Then! Then we’ll find Anarchocrats everywhere!
There seems to be little wisdom in adopting a label that is commonly understood as violent and dangerous. Still, it’s a real cool mark of a true counter-cultural revolutionary to proclaim oneself an Anarchist and take all the oh-so-misunderstood negative denotations and connotations which come with it. Sheep in wolves’ clothing are nothing new, a get-up which inspires fear. It’s a quick ego boost and a rush of power, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with non-coercion.