Why Anarchy rules (irony intended)

Yes, I want anarchy. In this essay, I will explain why anarchy will serve us better instead of communism or democracy IN THEORY. Feasibility-wise, anarchy is impossible. Want to know why I’m writing this essay? Because I’m BORED!!! Studying for motorboat test is as dry as the sahara desert.
Ok, here goes. *clears throat.
Leadership is a tricky thing. It’s hard to satisfy the sheep you lead. People have a myriad of unlimited wants and this leader is expected to satisfy every one of these wants. If wants are not satisfied, you get a shoe in your face like Bush. Or, you make make a million promises of change and be loved by everyone.
The leader is expected to deliver
If the leader does not, masses get angry and start to revolt. Riots or by simply voting the leader off. However, whatever the leader does and does not do will inevitably anger a certain group of people. So the trick is maintaining the golden ratio of civilian satisfaction. A little dissatisfaction in a country can be compromised to ensure the satisfaction for the vast majority.
HOWEVER, it seems in today’s context. Leader’s have taken their job too far. A leader’s position is one often associated with fame and fortune. Why? Because they do an extremely tiresome and stressful job they cry out to justify insane salaries that they give themselves. This concept of leader-elitism is screwed up. I choose anarchy.
Anarchy is not a bad thing. Anarchy is a lovely thing. No oppression, no power struggles. Pure freedom to act in your will. But anarchy doesn’t mean doing what you want with no authorial check. If this is the case, rapists will run free on the streets and I’d rather go back to communist Russia than to see that happen. In this essay, I’ll present a new form of Anarchy.
An anarchy based on respect
How can a country with no head tick? Or how can a chicken without a head walk forward? Simple, when there is no need for a head. IF the local populace is able to function as the authority itself, then there is no need for a governing authority. But this not going to work out. Leaders are needed even in an anarchy. Leaders to delegate work, manage taxes. A governing authority to manage the country. Then WTF? SOME ANARCHY IS THIS. Hold your horses there. In my anarchy, the leaders have zeo authority. No power, they act because the people let them.
To me, a leader is no different than a follower who is responsible for managing other group members. A leader is a role. Not a RANK. In other words, the term POWER does not exist and all members are in fact EQUAL with different jobs to do based on their talents. It does not give the appointed leader power. But then, without power, a leader cannot make his followers to act upon his will. Here’s when the respect comes in. Followers will act based on their respect for the leader. It’s like respecting advice.
A leader’s orders is nothing but advice
If it’s advice then you can either choose the listen or not right? If I do take the advice, it’s because it clicks with my own will, i respect that the leader has done his research and come up with the best solution. But reasons for NOT listening would be because it DOESN’T click with my own will or that i don’t understand WHY the leader wants this. So in this anarchy, everyone does things based on REASON. Because they understand and are happy with their orders. And happy workers (non-leaders) are productive workers are they not?
Police will not be needed as people respect each other. So the only welfare institutions would be the army, hopsitals and other stuff. Heh heh. Can’t really think of everything.
However this process of understanding orders will take a shit long time.If CHINA is to go anarchaic, imagine the amount of flyers or whatnot must be printed to distribute to the people!!! It is almost darn impossible. Even in a small country in Singapore, the unhappy workers and leaders would have to go through a lot of reasoning and policy adjustments before anything can be implemented. So my anarchy is not possible.
Furthermore, not everyone is mature enough to handle this sort of reasoning process. So my anarchy is elitist. In my quest to eliminate elitism, i am actually spawning a elitist country! So what’s going to happen to the immature, and probable, majority? They cannot be left out of this process or else the anarchy will never be fully built on respect and understanding. Education reforms? That’s a probable solution but not guaranteed to work 100%. And sloths should be sent into exile. Those scumbags who will not work and drain resources will not be tolerated.
It is also terribly easy to disrupt the delicate balace in my anarchy. Sow a little dissent and it’ll spread like wildfire among the nation and turn people against themselves. Without anyone to break the fight, the frenzied people will probably tear themselves to death.
And honestly, do you think people really want to work for respect? I can freaking buy over a prostitute’s respect for under a hundred per night. Respect is not what people want and probably never will.
Anarchy, right idea, wrong species
Perhaps I shall build myself a spaceship and preach to other extraterrestrials out there who just might be receptive to my idea.
Written by Camperhero
Who is currently wondering whether it’s possilble to vote for anarchy

3 comments on “Why Anarchy rules (irony intended)

  1. Ahmad says:

    hey yo! interesting idea.but i think you\’re a bit late by 160 years.i think a guy named Karl Marx beat you to it.you basically described the ideal utopia that he wrote about before people tried it out and found out they couldnt.(:

  2. Thomas says:

    dammit. At least I know it won\’t work and not go on a political crusade

  3. Keith says:

    haha, your anarchy reminds me somewhat of rousseau\’s social contract. However, it is lacking in empirical evidence, no? Without empirical evidence or facts or whatnot, you are just as guilty as Marx: fabricating an ideal that cannot be proven correct or wrong, in Popperian terms, unfalsifiable. Such a misguided ideal can have terrible ramification if the populace actually put faith in it! Just as Ahmad said \’people tried it out and found out they couldn\’t\’, an understatement of the suffering Marxism brought to majority of the communist around the world.Oh, and one more thing, the same way a melted ice lolly can no longer be called an \’ice lolly\’ (it\’s a sugary mess with a stick), I don\’t think you can still call your proposed ideology \’anarchism\’. Maybe you can call it Kwokism? ^^(:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s