John Locke Anarchy

Anarchy, literally meaning “without ruler”, is a concept often classified as a state of dysfunction, and overall chaos. However, as a political theory, anarchy is a state of being where the absence of government allows the individual to pursue absolute freedom. The idea of little to no government control has been a controversial issue since the creation of hierarchical societies. I believe that anarchy as a political theory is not an effective one, simply because human nature does not allow us to be able to live in a society without hierarchy. Prior to the formation of states, humans have lived for thousands of years without a government or any sort of hierarchal structure. It was not until the creation of hierarchical societies that sparked

Locke was also an Enlightenment thinker, he focused on rationality and emphasized innate human rights. To Locke, the state of nature is a state where men are born equal, free, and independent, which is very similar to Hobbes’ view on human beings. Individuals have freedom to do whatever they please, however there should be a limit. A person’s actions should not infringe on another person’s freedom. I believe that this philosophy is much more effective and moral compared to Hobbes’ view. John Locke wrote a book titled, The Second Treatise of Civil Government, where he describes [“A state also of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another...”]. Locke is saying that although in the state of nature, we are all born equal, hierarchies are needed in society because without them, there would be total chaos. In the state of nature, according to Locke, man has two powers; the ability to do whatever he deems necessary in order to maintain self-preservation, and the ability to punish others that have committed a crime. In a hierarchical society, man is stripped away of these abilities, so it is understandable as to why one would want to break away from the government. However, the purpose of government is to secure life and property. In an anarchic state, the lack of governance will lead to problems that would make life insecure.

For the past two decades, Somalia has been living in a total state of anarchy, characterized by lawlessness and overall chaos. In the late 19th century, during the “Scramble for Africa”, Great Britain and Italy took over Somalia. However, Somalia began to resist both the British and the Italian governments, which led to the country being in a state of rebellion for decades. Finally, in 1960 Somalia won its independence, but it did not last. In 1969, Mohamed Siad Barre came into power, his actions caused many Somalis to rebel which led to him being overthrown. Once Siad Barre had been overthrown in 1991, Somalia was thwarted into a civil war between rival warlords and clan-based militia. Since then, the country has been living in a constant state of anarchy. According to the article, Somalia and the High Price of Failure by Barrett Sheridan, the author states “ The global cost of anarchy in Somalia and other failed states like Haiti is far higher than most assume. The total bill, according to new estimates by political scientists at Oxford University, comes to $270 billion a year and includes the damage from civil war and the lost income due to non functioning economies… Still, the brunt of the tab--some 87 percent--is borne by the neighbors of failed states, whose national incomes are depressed by the nearby chaos”. Failing anarchic states are not only extremely dangerous, but it is also costly for citizens