The Possibilities for Anarchy (I)Written by Angelique van Engelen
When organising a country or a group of people in need of structuring, people tend to automatically sidestep ideologies that do not take authority imposed from above for granted.
Anarchists and other proponents of alternative rule almost by definition are seen as destructive elements in a society. Yet old time and modern thinkers on subject might have some viable and decent ideas for future state organisation.
The unwieldy mess called internet gives rise to many new thoughts and also causes many people to revisit older ideals and alternative scene is resultantly more vibrant than ever. Its frequent intersection with mainstream only adds to clout of its substance. Going about researching possibilities for anarchy as a viable alternative to a current system of government ought to be as chaotic as we can make it if we want to keep in line with subject's concept. But we need to keep in mind that whilst we're digging, results are streamlined by algorithms.
Surfing web and drawing 'chaotically' from input of various disciplines on anarchy throws off quite interesting results. Taking anarchy at face value, you realise soon your hunch as to why it has such a negative connotation is right. To be fair, situations in which anarchy gets bad press, are almost invariably justified. Not only do anarchists rear often ugly heads when they have issues with incumbent governments that tie them together as an impromptu group of people for short stretches of times only, with a negative spirit as a combining agent, seemingly too weak to justify action. They often continue to destroy for sake of destruction only.
Anarchy and regime change go hand in hand. Most of times that anarchists are seen 'live' in action, they are -true to nature of their political inclination- not organised in any way and they generally serve only to achieve short term goals before they go back to their ordinary lives. Anarchists can have very justified opinions, but in many cases their action is nevertheless condemned by majority of fellow country men in favor of a new organised government.
The situation in Kyrgyzstan during onset of American invasion most recently brought topic to bear for renewed analysis and prior to that, Iraq invasion by American troops yielded fresh material for students of international law to break their heads over in years to come.
Due to rather short term nature of anarchy when it is a 'live' concept, there is a lot of obscurity around how systems based on no rule or anarchy would be able to function in a positive way. There is no area or country in world that has seen a situation of anarchy through for more than a decade by choice. Yet this does not mean that concept is not pondered by more selfrespecting scholars of all disciplines. A quick browse on internet reveals tons of information.
The concepts that would create true anarchic systems as mature alternatives for governments are somewhat more decent than you would hope or expect, depending on your notion of adventure or distaste for your current government. By definition, anarchists oppose merely government, not order or society. "Liberty is Mother, not Daughter of Order" wrote Proudhon, and most self respecting thinkers pondering anarchic ideals agree. Kropotkin, put it, "No destruction of existing order is possible, if at time of overthrow, or of struggle leading to overthrow, idea of what is to take place of what is to be destroyed is not always present in mind. Even theoretical criticism of existing conditions is impossible, unless critic has in mind a more or less distinct picture of what he would have in place of existing state. Consciously or unconsciously, ideal, conception of something better is forming in mind of everyone who criticizes social institutions."
Former Terrorrists Getting into Government need Time, not God on their SideWritten by Angelique van Engelen
Today, in many countries' political realities, tribalist and nationalist or globalist forces clash fiercely, undermining chances of peace and democracy. This is particularly topical in Middle East, where efforts by established leaderships to discourage armed conflict have reached a new phase, in which both Hezbollah and Hamas, organizations labeled 'terrorist' by US, are nudged to start thinking about participation in mainstream politics.
The number of countries in world at moment that are in some form of transition is higher than some ten years ago, and in some ways more efforts are made to resolve situations that threaten stability. And moves of all involved parties are not without major-league risks.
By finally addressing security issues by making a clean sweepthrough, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas is slowly shifting into gear, starting clampdown on Palestinian insurgency that has long been called for. he has even told Hamas fighters publicly to give up their arms, This was a first for president who until now has been anything but clear on security issues. The Hamas leaders according to a report in London Asharq Al Awsat paper are reportedly planning to return to Gaza after Israelis have withdrawn.
The newspaper report detailed that leaders are likely to move their group's political bureau to Gaza as soon as Israel transfers control over border crossings to Palestinian Authority. "When a militia turns into a political party, I believe issue of a need for arms becomes irrelevant," Abbas was quoted as saying. "There will be only one authority, one law and one legal [armed force]," according to recently elected Palestinian leader, who played down risks involved in operation, saying that this has happened many times before in history.
Hamas leaders however deemed it necessary to reiterate that they have no intention of disarming at all. "Our fingers will remain on rifle triggers until removal of occupation," Hamas spokesman Mushir al-Masri said, according to Israeli Al Haaretz paper. Even though Hamas has participated in elections recently, Masri doubted that this means members are actually going to function as such.
It is remarks like these that worry international community very much. US President George W. Bush has been said to be waiting with inviting Palestianian leader Abbas until he has got something of substance to report. Perhaps an invitation will finally be extended soon now. The Palestinian leader has installed a hardliner as new intelligence chief. Tareq Abu Rajab, who used to be deputy intelligence chief, is known to have played an important role in a crackdown on militant group Hamas.
Hamas, which has participated in municipal elections already, might see next July's municipal elections turn out in its favor. "Extrapolating from present point in time, Hamas I believe would gain between 30 and 50 percent in elections to Palestinian Legislative Council in July. Fateh is in total disarray and is searching for its lost identity", said Matti Steinberg, an Israeli former security advisor to two heads of Israel General Security Service. "Hamas could register considerable gains in elections and possibly demand to play a role in next Palestinian Authority government", according to Yossi Alpher, a former senior advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. The gains that 'party to be' is likely to win are largely due to unhappiness of Palestine population with Fateh party, which has lost its identity more or less due to dysfunctioning of PA.
This is echoed by Ghassan Khattib, Palestinian Authority minister of planning. "It is possible that Hamas, which so far maintains a fundamentalist ideological and extreme political position, will become a pragmatic movement if it has chance to be part of official politics, locally, regionally and internationally. The rhetoric of Hamas now reminds many of Fateh's rhetoric when it was treated by "legitimate powers" as an "illegal terrorist group". Fateh successfully worked out a trade-off. It was recognized and included in system in return for playing politics within parameters of international legality", he says.