Skip to main content

Is anarchy a workable philosophy? The answer from science fiction....

Two of my favorite SF authors--for completely different reasons--are the later A E Van Vogt and Larry Niven.

Niven is the acknowledged dean of hard SF, while van Vogt was famous for the often dream-like quality of his stories.

Both writers have dealt with the interesting question of whether society could survive in a state of anarchy: Van Vogt with his 1977 novel The Anachronistic Colossus and Niven with the short story "Cloak of Anarchy" (which you can read in its entirety here).

Curiously, both arrived at the same conclusion: for anarchy to work, there has to exist an impartial authority with the power to prevent or punish transgressions.

Both use ubiquitous monitoring systems that are in virtually every public space, with the power to zap the perpetrators of force or fraud before--or immediately after--they commit an act of aggression.

Both systems are designed to run normally without human intervention.

Both systems are designed to allow you to do pretty much whatever you want, unless you set out to hurt somebody else.

Niven explores what happens when the system breaks down and people are free to transgress without possibility of witness or retribution; van Vogt deals in how an anarchistic society might actually be able to defend itself from an alien invasion.

There are two particular points of interest here: one is the idea that a non-violent anarchistic society could not exist until the decentralized technology to enforce that non-violence (detached from a government through automation) has evolved. I don't know that I like this conclusion: I'm still pretty damn unhappy about automated cameras at stoplights with the ability to send me a ticket, as well as facial recognition software employed in the so-called War on Terror.

The second significant point is that nothing in the technologies proposed by van Vogt or Niven is more than a few years down the pike. That's genuinely scary, because that leap I cannot make with them is the leap to a disinterested, incorruptible system for enforcing bans on aggression. What I see instead are State and Corporations given the perfect Gestapo-like tools of control and using them.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Short answer- NO. Anarachy always historically leads to a dictatorship. Anarchy is the worst possible system. It is an interregium of uncontrolled human ambition. Unless people have self-government, then government is constituted as a "necessary evil"- according to our founding documents.

For people to be self governed there must be some level of respect for the ancestors, filial piety, social stability and financial equality.

The systems of government that work the best are two: 1. Constitutional Republicanism as defined by William Penn and 2. Confucian Mututal Benefit as defined in the Analects.

The first is relatively new and is a development of the enlightenment and Quakerism and Freemasonry, the second dates from what? Circa 550-600BC but is pre-dated to about 3779 BC by the development of a system of filial piety and respect for the ancestors.

Those are the systems of government that work.

Anarchy is a deplorable dark age, becuase as our founder fathers warned us, "men are not angels" and until we practice being good as well as being efficent, no self-regulated system will come into existence, and without mutual benefit where each individual benefits the other and works for the fulfillment of their potential as well as our own, it is impossible to speak about the idea of not living under government.

To me anarchy means that the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must and moral order and civilization are disordered toward power, and not ordered toward virtue. One can not call that civilization at all. Rather it is what it has always been barbarianism.
tom said…
SF authors F Paul Wilson and L Neil Smith both make pretty reasonable attempts at constructing working anarchist societies with no such magical authority.

Economist David Friedman has written pretty extensively on the subject of anarchies in The Machinery of Freedom and many of his other books.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?