Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ARTelevision
I have come to the conclusion that I am a firm adherent of authoritarian ideas. As I see it, this is antithetical to anarchism and it stands in opposition to libertarianism.
This is based on my conception of human nature. I see us as essentially unable to observe, scrutinize, and comprehend things in a sufficiently self-critical manner and it is also a result of our basal anarchic tendency. Anarchy is a given in the state of nature. It needs no further promotion. The anarchic principle arises as forms of libertatrianism in civilized discourse.
Authoritarian rule has risen to the surface in supposedly different political systems. This is because it is the required parameter of civilized life. Humans are savage, self-serving individuals who require systems of control for optimum social operation. The only way humans are civilized is by fear.
IMO, the question is not what can or should replace the universal authoritarianism of forms of governance. The question is one of control - how much and what manner of control are best.
|
Interesting points ART; you sound like you would enjoy reading Hobbes' Leviathan, as it discusses several similar issues about humanity and a chaotic state of nature.
However, I do disagree with your notions, because of the tendency of humanity to abuse authoritarian forms of governance, and the desire to control. All of these things inevitably lead to a corrupt government. Have you read Orwell's 1984? That work alone is quite a convincing argument against authoritarianism.