On Societal Anarchism

Transcending Concepts Of Realism Applied To The Nature Of Governance, A Short Essay.

By Don Via Jr.
(Originally penned Oct. 18th, 2020)

Have enough candid conversations regarding the concept of true individual Liberty; i.e. voluntaryism, and eventually some will retort that "Your ideas are too radical and unrealistic".

To that, my counter is to pose the question: "What does ‘unrealistic’ actually mean?"

How do we conceptualize what is and is not "real"? Especially when new discoveries are made and barriers broken every single day, somewhere in the world.

In a sense, all "unrealistic" actually means is that a concept is inconceivable in one's current purview of reality within accepted normalcy.

However plenty of fantastical and unrealistic concepts have very much become reality over the ages despite that;

For thousands of years it was regarded as an unrealistic fantasy to believe that mankind would ever soar among the clouds, until December 17, 1903 when Orrville & Wilbur Wright first ascended into the skies.

The concept that humanity would ever travel stars was merely fiction until Yuri Gagarin become the first man to visit space on April 12th, 1961.

Newton's formulation of gravitational law was held as gospel until Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was published in 1916, completely rearranging our understanding of physics. And even now modern physicists are continuing to expand our understanding of the quantum world beyond what Einstein thought possible.

Examples like this are innumerable. As Plato once said, necessity is the mother of invention.

Human beings tend to always push the boundaries of what is perceived as feasible, or realistic. In search of better methods of doing things. Often they are condemned for their ideas until the legitimacy of it becomes apparent. As was the case of Galileo, who was thrown in prison for proving that the Earth was not in fact the center of the universe. A fate similar to so many other so-called heretics that challenge the accepted normality.

To my point, for thousands of years people have existed with this belief that human civilization requires rigid centralized government. That our existence necessitates that we have a ruler or a master to control ourselves and our neighbors for our own good, because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.

This idea persists through the fantasy that somehow aristocratic individuals are to be held in a higher regard, or are more valuable and thus “better” than the rest of us, when that is not the case at all. They simply outwardly present the materialistic illusion that they are; strip away the ego and materialism and we are all the same.

For thousands of years our species has held the belief that a small group of “elites” has to be in charge of the masses. That has been the basis of the formation of all states of government throughout the ages, and thusly all of the atrocities committed therein in it’s name.

Think about it, open any history book, nearly every significantly awful event throughout human history has been predicated upon the action of the State. Either against their own people, or against another State for the aims of power and wealth.

Every atrocity, every systemic injustice, no matter when or where it was committed, was committed in the name of government. Typically carried by good people, committing a horrible acts, hypnotized by the illusion of authority.

The idea that some people have the right to rule, and others don't. When in reality we are all inherently sovereign beings. True authority can only be granted from consent. Rule without expressed informed consent of the individual is oppression by any other name.

Over the millennia of humanity's evolution we have come a long way in many aspects; technologically, idealistically, scientifically, philosophically, etc.

And yet we retain the most archaic form of civilizational organization. Through which our species has continued the cycle of the same barbarisms generation after generation. — War, famine, mass poverty, genocide, ecocide.

All the consequences of the inadequacies of the State.

Organizational structures of government may have evolved throughout time; from monarchies and dictatorships, to republics and democracies. But they are all still at their core the same inherently corrupt system of collectivist tribalism that prevents us from making true advancements as a species.

If 5000 years of government has shown us anything, it is that mankind was never meant to be ruled. Throughout its history human civilization has always been oppressed, abused, or exploited in some form because they've yet to learn that the problem is not how the state is administered — but that the state exists in the first place.

I think eventually that the belief in the State is going to come to an end as human civilization is begins to realize the follies of the ruling class.

A mass shift in consciousness is necessary for humanity to propel itself forward beyond the restraints of a so called ruling class. One that has proven itself to be the most malevolent opponent to the peaceful advancement of civilization.

Soon enough I believe humanity is going to realize that we are all capable of doing for ourselves, without the need of assigned masters, and that a peaceful, civil, and prosperous society based on the voluntary cooperation of individuals is an idea very much within the realm of "realistic".