Anarchism is noble as a manifestation of revolt against the unjust and usurping power relations on which society rests. Men like Stirner, Thoreau, and Proudhon denounce and demolish all the hypocrisy that covers the false arguments that sustain the exploitation of liberties. These are men who flatly refuse to accept as normal a state of systematic abuse in which, on the one hand, a few usurpers enjoy, and on the other, the powerless usurped suffer. Such men are, to say like Nietzsche, free spirits, who would not think twice about preferring death to an existence of dishonor and slavery.
Tag: philosophy
Modern Democracies
Modern democracies have brought together all the most devious means ever invented by the human mind and have materialized a supreme and unprecedented ode to hypocrisy. This much-acclaimed system, whose criticism is inadmissible and may earn a place in jail, boils down to a tyranny that only grows stronger as the years go by. A tyranny, therefore, a legitimate system, but oppressive, unjust and cruel. The individual, who has absolutely no part in it, has to swallow it and finance it, even in the face of unacceptable abuses and absurdities, watching, gagged and with his hands tied, the perpetuation of a will that can be manipulated and is effectively manipulated by scoundrels, a will contrary to his interests. For everything that once seemed unattainable to the most shameless of tyrants, today there are sure means of execution, and so it seems that souls, more than ever, are submitted and unable to react.
Having a “Cause” and Wanting to Impose It
There is a remarkable difference between having a “cause” and wanting to impose it on the rest of men. It is possible to say, at first, that this difference is character. But it can also be said that the more the feeling inspired by the “cause” is true, the more its “benefits” are clear in the mind of the one who has it, the more will be the natural impulse to want other men to have it too, or to “enjoy” it. Here, then, we come to the imposition. There is no way to interpret it, regardless of how it is practiced, or how it is founded, if not as a primary violation, a direct attack on the freedom of the individual. The imposition will never be noble, and after the tyranny has been perpetrated, those who have suffered it can no longer be called free men.
At the Same Time that Prudence…
At the same time that prudence demands attention to the future, peace refuses to appear in the mental room where it is present. The future, coldly analyzed, is the end and the possibility of the end. In a lower instance, it is the present uncertainty materializing into a nightmare. For there to be peace, there must be no apprehension, and apprehension can hardly be avoided when one glimpses tomorrow. In part, the tranquility of the Buddhist who has nothing and fears nothing is understandable; but unless there is a total break with attachments, something almost fanciful, it does not seem possible to be so and not also be irresponsible.