In today's contemporary society, the need for a functional ideology is vital for the success of a nation. This essay will provide in-depth description about one certain ideology but also provide anarchistic arguments for their views.
The ideology that will be discussed is Social Anarchism. Social Anarchism is probably the most criticized ideology in today's society because it is often referenced to violence, uproar and as an undisciplined ideology. However these prejudice opinions are starting to be suppressed and the true greatness of Anarchism is starting to appear to individuals.In this essay I will be providing answers to how Social Anarchism deals with ownership, decision making, welfare and elections.
What is social anarchism and what does it stand for? Is probably the first inquiry people would make about the ideology. Social anarchism is an ideology constructed for the working class and the people. The main focus with anarchism is to allow the individuals to be involved and thus prevent the form of a hierarchical control. About 78,3% of a country consists of the working class; however in today's society they're role in politics is only minor.Is it not rightful to give the working class and the individuals the right to make all the decisions, is it not they who make the country? What differentiates Social anarchism from other ideologies is in the system of how decisions are to be made.
They absolutely abhor states and any form of government. When reading this, the first impression would be that this ideology will never be able to function; however that is not necessarily true. Social Anarchists believe that decision should be made in councils.Now you might be wondering, would that not be a sort of government? In the contrary no, councils differentiate themselves from parliament and governments because they are not a form of hierarchical control. These councils consist of all sorts of individuals, so that the people of a nation are involved in the decision making.
The motivation for this sort of governing is to prevent social class division between the "bosses" and "the working class" and also allow people to have the right to make a difference, since it's their country and their lives these decisions affect.A common argument used against this is that Parliaments and Governments do allow the individuals and working class to be involved in politics in the form of elections. However is that really true? Today's modern society's way of electing parties or electing presidents from candidates is simply corrupt. We are led to believe that states are run in our interest, and told that we have elections to insure that.
Today's ideology gives us choices to choose from, but what we don't realize is that all these choices are pre-handpicked, in other words all the choices are correct within the ideology ruling the nation.How can this be democracy when it limits people's freedom of choice and the right of making an individual decision based on your own views. Therefore Social anarchists are against parliaments and governments being elected through elections. The main motivation in conclusion to this is the following; Voters are seen as mere spectators during elections. People are seen as mere voters and not as people who can actually be involved in politics.
Therefore one can conclude that electing parties and presidents does not form a democratically run country.This motivation can be clearly proven by simply looking on how elections are run in Sweden. Do you really think that the moderates won the elections purely because of democracy? No, of course not, they look at people as mere voters and through mass media and propaganda gained voters and support. Another issue is how the welfare system of a nation should be run.
Anarchism unlike other ideology does not express explicit views, details and opinions regarding various issues and how they should be solved; this is because they believe by doing so you are forming boundaries for their ideology.Due to this there is not a concrete answer to how the welfare system should be run, but instead certain views and logic provided in aid for making a decision on how it should be run. Social-Anarchists believe in a social welfare however not if it is in reliant of government or a hierarchical control. If possible councils and assemblies should form a social welfare system without the necessity of a hierarchical control system.
This may be financed through the use of tax or the countries economical profits.Due to the fact that anarchists believe that production is for use and not for profit, education and medical care are sought to be the right for all individuals and not to be charged for. However social-anarchists believe that though to be able to provide these conditions, each individual has to contribute their part to society to prevent greediness in society. In conclusion: All individuals are provided social welfare, since it is not right to allow "the bosses" to get care because they are rich whilst the working class to suffer because of economical issues.This is a fundamental pillar of success; the unity of all people together this way in a society will provide the best living conditions and lives for everybody.
Below i have provided views but must important potential arguments from 3 different ideologies;- Fascists: This is an ideology which opposes anarchism and its views. They believe in dictatorship and unlike anarchism believe that individuals are obligated to serve the state and not themselves. They argue and say that individuals are not capable of making decisions by themselves.The state and a hierarchical control are vital for a country to function properly.
How can we rely upon the people to take responsibility and take actions, individuals are not capable of handling such a difficult task, instead It should be left to a dictator. A smart and capable dictator is what a nation need, anarchism is loose cannon, and there is no strong hierarchical control to differentiate between right and wrong decisions. It is believed by fascists that it is an inevitability that an anarchistic nation would fall simply because people can't make the right decisions themselves.This is because individuals are naturally greedy; and then to expect them to make a common decision is simply unworkable. A way of backing up their arguments is to use history, nearly all countries/nations run by dictators in the past have been economically wealthy and been highly developed.
Social-democrats: This is an ideology which agrees wit h anarchism at certain issues. However social democracy believes that a democratically controlled parliament is required to make the decisions.Anarchists main arguments against a democratically chosen parliaments is the idea of that elections are corrupt since the parties look at people as mere voters than people who can be involved and make a difference. Social-democrats however argue and say that anarchists have interpreted it all wrong.
Just because political parties look at people as mere voters doesn't justify why they would be considered unfair and corrupt. Political parties looking at people as voters allow them to give the people what they want so that they gain votes.Is a political party corrupt because it looks at people as voters and provides the solutions the people want? Of course not; this way of thinking actually causes the political parties to strive to perfect their party to the peoples suiting. Anarchists also believe that social-democrats use propaganda through the use of media to gain voters, however that is not true.
Political parties merely campaign what their party believes in and fights for. If it were propaganda methods being used why would people not have reformed or revolutionized away from this ideology?In conclusion, elections and a parliament is the fairest and most functional method of electing and establishing a state. (Note: Social democrats believe in a government for the exact same reason fascists do; because people are not capable of making decisions themselves, instead they need somebody to represent for them; which in this ideology should be a political party). Communism: This ideology argues the way the anarchists think about the welfare system and whom it shall be provided to.Anarchists believe that the social welfare system should be available for all individuals, poor, rich or disabled; whether it be financed through tax or any other way.
Communism argues; they believe that people will only exploit the state and live on social benefits and get medical care they do not deserve. Why should the individuals who have worked and spent their whole life to get an income, to be forced to pay tax that is to be used for welfare for people who do not deserve it.People who have money have the right to pay and get the care they need. Poor individuals will have to do exactly the same thing as everybody else, and that is to work to get the same welfare care. This way of organizing the welfare system is the fairest and does not suppress the wealthy to be forced to give out money they have worked for, to the poor.
There should be a welfare system but this way of organizing it will prevent it from becoming a charity; as it will become for the anarchists.
