Arguments Against Anarchism

598 Words2 Pages

Everyone lives life in some kind of order. People do things in certain ways and plan things in certain ways. If plans get interrupted or moved around, people usually get frustrated. Everyone is used to order. People wouldn’t be able to function properly if there wasn’t some kind of system set in place. Anarchism is seen as form of society that has no government or system set into place.
Anarchy is the belief that all forms of government are corrupt and unnecessary. It is the belief that government should not exist. Not all anarchist believe in a world of chaos though. Some only believe that the government is corrupt and shouldn’t be in place, not a world of chaos. These people believe that there are other ways of making things happen without having a government. Anarchist also believe that the common man, meaning the people how work and are not rich but are not poor either, should be the ones who dictate what happens and how things are done. The most known supporter of anarchism is Max Stirner. He was a German philosopher. He was basically an Egoist. He believed that every action that someone took was taken because it was for a person's own self interest even when the action or decision was selfless. Stirner believed that everyone …show more content…

Without structure, the world would be chaos. We all have a way of doing things, so if there were to suddenly change we would be lost. People would do whatever they wanted. He/She would commit crimes and start acting out because there would be no consequences. Some people may keep their morals and customs, but criminals and bad people would just revel in it. Crime rates would sky rocket in a world of anarchism. Even if people did find a way to get things done without a form of government, it would take much longer to get things done. I agree with Stirner’s belief that people should do things for themselves, but I also believe that our actions affect others so we need to be careful during our decision

Open Document