How can we be governed, or how can we govern ourselves?
Firstly, could we have no government? Could Anarchism work?
Anarchism is derived from Ancient Greek and meant “without ruler”. According the the Merriam-Wester Dictionary Anarchism is a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups. Wikipedia’s page on Anarchy describes various meanings, as there are connotations to such a society described in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary that conjure up lawlessness and chaos.
While anarchistic societies are common in small hunter-gatherer societies, and were most likely common before the Agricultural (Neolithic) Revolution starting around 12,000 years ago, there are few if any, lasting anarchist societies in “civilised” complex societies.
There have been several attempts at anarchist societies in the past, including small religious groups in Europe and America, and after the Bolshevik Revolution between 1918 and 1921 in the Free Territory of Ukraine. Later there were attempts in Spain leading up to the Spanish Civil War. In fact the largest anarchist organisation in the world today is the Confederación General del Trabajo (CGT) in Spain. However this organisation is a political one wanting change, rather than a functioning and self (non) governing community, proving that its ideals can work in practice. Advocates of modern Anarchist movements are very varied in their beliefs and expectations, but may generally reject organised government, because that is viewed as so unfair and corrupt, and is beyond cleansing.
Can this ideal really function?
There has been no long-lasting or effective Anarchist society in recent times. What near-Anarchist hunter-gatherer society has not been influenced, destroyed or corrupted by foreign influence?
The very concept of no government pre-supposes that people can be trusted to be fair and just. Can we be trusted?
If such a hypothetical situation did exist, what would the minimum requirement be for this Anarchist society to exist and more importantly to thrive?
To begin with, and since we must suppose (by definition) it could only be democratic, the majority of its citizens would have to understand the philosophy of equality, fairness, and responsibility to allow for the “lack of governance”. I imagine a society of ascetics or wise people, or John Lennon “free love” hippies, but one where any antagonism is immediately reconciled, and not allowed to fester. It would be idealistic indeed – a real Utopia.
If this is not feasible, then some some of government, control or hierarchy is needed to implement rules – all anathema to an Anarchist system.
Furthermore, even if an idealistic Anarchist society were ever to establish itself, how would it remain so, as the rest of the human world would have to allow it to exist, and not undermine its existence with their own needs or greed?
While hypothetically an ideal society could exist, such as sought after in some religious communities, I view it as practically impossible today for the reasons stated above, and due to observations on ourselves as a species.
The obvious question if my reasoning is valid is –
If there has to be a government, what kind of government should it be?
In view of earlier arguments on the risks of change, and especially a change where the outcome has not been tested, I want to proceed by examining why power is conceded by people, and look at the alternative major systems of government that have been tested so far.