Image Courtesy of: What thefuck happened to the U.S.?
People often associate Anarchism with chaos, deception, and cruelty. In America it is seen as the betrayal of the government, and traditional society often believes that it goes against everything we stand for. What many fail to realize is that, Anarchism is not only the fight to be independent but the fight to sustain independence and build a new. Anarchists are those who encourage the ignorant to stop living a false sense of reality, and to educate themselves on moral philosophy. Emma Goldman’s Essay, Anarchism: What It Really Stands For, challenges the very fabric of Anarchism’s roots.
Emma Goldman begins by establishing the fact that people against Anarchism base their reasoning for the opposition off of the idea that it is a charming concept but unrealistic, when, in fact, Anarchism is substantially the most realistic of all principles. She writes: “…Anarchism is indeed practical. More than any other idea, it is helping to do away with the wrong and foolish; more than any idea, it is building and sustaining new life. The emotions of the ignorant man are continuously kept at a pitch by the most blood-curdling stories about Anarchism” (2). This passage is showing that in order to keep us conformed and obedient, the government as well as modern society, will feed us with the notion that Anarchy is malevolent when in reality it only questions the injustice Americans face on a daily basis. Most of us work 9 am to 5 pm and 5 pm to 9 am yet we still struggle to make it in life and attempt to live under the pretenses that someday our lives will get better while one percent of the nation hoards a huge portion of the money. Anarchism is not evil, it gets rid of the evil and is the debate between ignorance and intelligence.
It requires less mental effort to disapprove a certain aspect than to think about it and consider the possibilities. Goldman goes on to say: “The widespread mental indolence, so prevalent in society, proves this to be only too true. Rather than to go to the bottom of any given idea, to examine into its origin and meaning, most people will either condemn it altogether, or rely on some superficial or prejudicial definition of non-essentials” (2). She is saying that Americans would rather dismiss the idea that Anarchism is beneficial to society than to actually look into the idea of it. As humans we need an explanation for everything that goes on in or surrounding the world so we would rather lie to ourselves instead of deal with this uncertainty. We have been conditioned to believe that man is nothing when in reality man is the only one who can make a change and we must come to understand that knowledge is power. Goldman believes that we should stop focusing on trivial distractions, wake up, and become our own people without centralization. We need to view Anarchism from every angle and perspective instead of ruling it off as a vindictive theory. Being that people, in general, need an explanation for life’s tremendous mysteries, they become comfortable with lies. Goldman goes so far as to bring religion into the discussion:
"The explanation of the storm raging within the individual, and between him and his surroundings, is not far to seek. The primitive man, unable to understand his being, much less the unity of all life, felt himself absolutely dependent on blind, hidden forces ever ready to mock and taunt him. Out of that attitude grew the religious concepts of man as a mere speck of dust dependent on superior powers on high, who can only be appeased by complete surrender. All the early sagas rest on that idea, which continues to be Leitmotiv of the biblical tales dealing with the relation of man to God, to the State, to society. Again and again the same motif, man is nothing, the powers are everything. Thus Jehovah would endure man on condition of complete surrender. Man can have all the glories of the earth, but he must not become conscious of himself. The State, society, and moral laws all sing the same refrain: Man can have all the glories of the earth but he must not become conscious of himself" (3).
This excerpt serves as a representation of Goldman’s thesis. She is merely stating that religion has conditioned many of us to believe that man is nothing and in constantly repeating it we view it as normal to see ourselves as lesser beings. We began to repeat the mantra that we are nothing and eventually see every person with authority as higher powers running our system when we are the heart of society (Goldman 3) and it is traditional society that is corrupting us. Goldman’s belief is that the reason we are afraid to stand up for ourselves, and eventually overthrow the government, is because man-made ideas and oppositions of Anarchism forces us to conform. When we began to realize our true selves, awaken, and see certain aspects for what they truly are is when we become intelligent and can comprehend that Anarchism is not evil; and that is what Emma Goldman wants.
Furthermore, we live with the concept that wealth is everything and the desire to increase it rules our lives. We live with the illusion that we control our lives, and we do not. Anarchism breaks mental laziness and its main goal is to reveal hidden power within an individual, Goldman challenges authority in various ways with the confidence that religion, property and government is stopping man from being free and thinking for himself. She says, “But what are normal demands to an abnormal institution? The only demand that property recognizes is its own gluttonous appetite for greater wealth, because wealth means power; the power to subdue, to crush, to exploit, the power to enslave, to outrage, to degrade…what avail is all her wealth, if the individuals comprising the nation are wretchedly poor?” (4). Goldman is trying to say that wealth has most of us in its greedy grasp and it is used as a means to control us and get us to submit. It should not matter if the government has kings, queens, or a single ruler, its sole purpose is to control the individual. We are flocks of sheep living in a false reality, trying to increase our wealth while working in a mechanical, robot-like, state. She acknowledges this injustice and the inequality of man in American society by stating: “In a society where those who always work never have anything, while those who never work enjoy everything, solidarity of interests is non-existent; hence social harmony is but a myth” (6). Order through the surrender of the individual is not acceptable but that is the only way the government can control their citizens.
Goldman also challenges authority by bringing forth an extensive amount of information pertaining to crime, and the fact that because we are often working jobs that we hate, that is the culprit behind our resentment. She explains that crime happens because human energy is being channeled into doing mundane activities we hate on a daily basis and presents the understanding that, “Crime is naught but misdirected energy. So long as every institution of today, economic, political, social, and moral, conspires to misdirect human energy into wrong channels; so long as most people are out of place doing the things they hate to do, living a life they loathe to live, crime will be inevitable…” (6). This section shows that Goldman’s main idea is that in order to sustain a healthy life for Americans the government must go. The government is not human nature nor is it natural law even though it likes to seem as though it is. We have seen, on countless occasions, animals in cages and how their development completely changes yet, we allow ourselves to continue living in captivity. Although many people view Anarchism as repulsive and associate it with sin and destruction, Goldman’s understanding of it is that it is the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion, property, and the restraint of government (Goldman 7). It is the fight against the hindering of mankind as a whole and one must be small minded in order to conform and submit to an oppressive government. Goldman ends her writing in discussing the fact that if we did not have resistance or Anarchism then we would still have slavery, and we would still have a king and queen ruling over us. If people went about taking a stand by begging or trying to make compromises then change would have never happened.
Works Cited
Goldman, Emma. Anarchism and Other Essays: Anarchism: What It Really Stands For. California: University of California Regents, 2002.
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
