To what extent do anarchists agree about the nature of the future stateless society? For Anarchists the state is oppressive and represents the few who seek to oppress the many. The state is also charged with taking away our freedom through subjecting us to its laws and controls that are artificial, offending the basic principle of individual sovereignty. Furthermore the state is seen as corrupting to those in power, those who come into government may do so with good motives, but inevitably lose their idealism and become exploiters themselves. It is for these reasons that all traditions within Anarchism wish to advance human kind through the removal of the state in society.
Personality and moral self explain how and why human beings make free choices. The libertarianism theory has been explained by CA Campbell, who said that human beings see themselves as free agents and therefore accept moral responsibility for their actions. Humans must accept responsibility for these actions and face any consequences that may come their way. John Stuart Mill - an influencal figure in Liberatarianism – believe we are free and morally responsible for all our actions. Mill believed it was extremely important that an indivduals free will should not be crushed by society.
How and why have socialists endorsed collectivism? Socialism defines collectivism on the grounds that human beings have all the capacity of human being for collective action. In this way, socialists reject the liberal idea of a self-sufficient and self-contained human creature as well as 'atomised society'. A collective, unified collection of social creatures is capable of overcoming social and economic problems by drawing on the power of the community rather than individual effort. Socialists, therefore, endorsed collectivism to strenghten the idea of fraternity - society is desired to work together while being bounded by sympathy and comradership, that are believed to symbolise the the bonds of common humanity.
Media often portrays Libertarians as anarchists based on their belief in limited government. This is inherently wrong, because believing in limited government is still believing in government. Libertarians don’t believe society could function without laws and regulations. Libertarians believe government should be limited to provide more control to the people. Their core desire is to help individuals regain control of their lives.
Sebastian Faure described anarchism as a ‘negation of the principle of authority’. All anarchists believe that the state is oppressive and removes freedom. Malatesta described its role as ‘always that of oppressing and exploiting the masses’. Anarchists agree that the state is exploitative, seeing tax as ‘legalised theft’. The state is corrupt and corrupting.
author:love88 Karl Marx is the father of communism. In this essay “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx argues that class struggles between the bourgeoisie and proletarians. Marx believed that all property should be publically owned. There would be no government, and everyone would work together for the good of the community. Thus, the society would be classless and stateless.
Radicals believe that capitalist profit from consumers, who are being exploited. In relation to the bill, radicals would say it’s the capitalist who are destroying the environment and disregarding human presence all in the name of profits. Radicals would approve of the bill as it would put an end to exploitation. But it does not completely comply with their views. A radical solution doe not exist in a capitalist society, but can only work if capitalism no longer existed.
Marxist believe the conventional families are the foundations of capitalism it does this in many way; Private property inheritance, Marxists believe that all functions of the family are performed purely for the benefit of the capitalist system. One of the key factors determining how our society plays in to the hands of capitalism is was who inherits Private property. Engles, Marx friend and supporter, argues that a monogamous nuclear family has become essential in society as men had to be certain of the parentage of their offspring to guarantee that their legitimate heir inherit from them. In Engels eyes this made for a ‘historical defeat for the female sex’ suggesting that woman were now under men’s control and just mere of object to provide offspring to become a heir to the inheritance. Marxist altercate that woman will never receive liberation from patriarchal control with the means of capitalism and private ownership nearby.
The continued power grab will destroy the capitalist system shackling the limbs of the free market. The regulation imposed creates factions limiting the ease of market entry. The environment that our American business calls home must remain competitive assuring quality goods to consumers while encouraging technological advancements. The path our federal government is currently on is a path of non-democratic regulation that is a threat to the growth and prosperity of our country. It is simply a matter of the true meaning of the Constitution, specifically the commerce clause that must be addressed.
The government, and much of the nation, believed in the principles of laissez-faire economics, which dictated that the economic market should run freely without government interference. According to the theory, free, unregulated markets led to competition, which in turn led to fair prices of goods for consumers. The government did not want to interfere in the free market. Any concern for the plight of the poor during this time was minimized by the tenets of social Darwinism, which became popular in the late 1800s. Social Darwinism adapted Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, “survival of the fittest,” to the business world, arguing that competition was necessary to foster the healthiest economy (just as competition in the natural world was necessary to foster the healthiest, or fittest, species).