As part of our discussion on political ideologies, we’ve been talking about anarchism in one of my classes. In a nutshell, anarchy is reactionary; it opposes the influence of capitalism and power of government. It considers institutional government a hindrance to human progress.

The Industrial Revolution gave rise to the ideology of anarchism, as human labor became replaced by assembly lines; individual skills were overshadowed by machines, and a feeling of hopelessness led some to abhor the authority of governmental institutions.

At the core of anarchism is the belief that people — when left to their own devices without the influence of government — will naturally seek a harmonious society of benefit to all. (Call it human nature, sin, or whatever floats your boat, but I don’t think that humankind is inherently peaceable; I believe that we veer toward entropy and need some semblance of law-enforcing structure to keep us from “killing in the name” of a struggle for power.)

Ironically, anarchism is the purest form of “democracy” (rule of the people), though it is often associated with disorder and chaos stemming from the absence of government. Private property is seen as a tool of oppression that inhibits human liberty. I find it doubly ironic that bands like Rage Against the Machine, which has an image of The Anarchist Cookbook and the symbolic fist in the air on its website, must rely on capitalism to promote their music, fill the arenas and buy their merchandise. If capitalism is so evil, then why bother trying to sell anything? (For the record, I happen to like much of RATM’s music, particularly the less-rappy songs.)

Another thing I find interesting is that in Europe, the term libertarian is associated with socialism; whereas, here in the U.S. it refers to an ultra-conservative perspective. I wonder how many of the more extreme outliers in the Tea Party would appreciate knowing that their no-taxes-whatsoever stance mirrors the tenets of anarchism?