What comes to your mind when you hear the word anarchy? Is it a scene like unto “Mad Max Fury Road” or the Fallout video game series, a dystopian or semi-apocalyptic future, filled with bandits, feral beasts, cannibals, raiders, general chaos, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria? This may be the general idea that people have been conditioned into accepting: “Anarchy equals chaos, and Anarchists are defined as people who want lawlessness and absolute freedom.” However, we will see that this is not the case upon a simple analysis of language.

Anarchy, derived from the Greek word “anarkhia,” see also the French “anarchie”, the Latin “anarchia.” An, etymological definition: “Non, or without,” + arkhos = “leader, chief, ruler, captain” (archon). Anarchy merely means no arche/archon. This is an absence of a centralized leader with proclaimed authority and presumed power. Authority and power are not the same thing, one may have genuine authority, but not the power to execute it, and one may have the power of the gun, but no enumerated or delegated authority to deploy it in a valid manner.

A comparatively recent instance of this word being used dates to the 16th century, and originally meant: Absence of government. In 1660 A.D, it was used to convey the idea of an absence or confusion of authority in general. Circa 1849, the social theory of “order without power” came onto the scene, one may think of the principle of enlightened self-interest, herding, shoaling or murmuration. Proverbs 30:27- “Locusts have no king, yet they advance together in formation.” This philosophy of “order without power,” with centralized direct governance replaced by co-operatives and associations, was espoused by men such as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in the 1830s, often called the modern “father of anarchism.”

“Either the State for ever, crushing individual and local life, taking over in all fields of human activity, bringing with it its wars and its domestic struggles for power, its palace revolutions which only replace one tyrant by another, and inevitably at the end of this development there is … death! Or the destruction of States, and new life starting again in thousands of centers on the principle of the lively initiative of the individual and groups and that of free agreement. The choice lies with you!” -Attributed to Prince Peter Kropotkin, a proponent of anarcho-communism, (1842-1921), “The State: Its Historic Role,” 1896.

The struggle of the anarchist is not uniform in ultimate goal, but could be said to be against centralized, crushing, tyrannical rulership of mankind. Anarchists cannot be said to be homogenized in definition, but the general idea is hardly absolute chaos. “The State” uses a promise of security or gain to acquire the consent of people, and then the threat of violence where deception and fraud fail, in intention to oppress and plunder people, for the benefit of State Actors. An example of this tyrannical system would be the Federal United States and its franchise STATE OF STATE corporations and their acting Officers.

Is anarchy inherently chaos? Of course not. The concept of anarchy as chaos and lawlessness could be more accurately phrased as “anlegis” or “annomos.” “An” meaning non or without, as previously defined, and “legis” being Latin for law, with “nomos” being Greek for law. There are always going to be laws, we have natural laws, also called organic laws of course, and these form a basis for the unwritten common law of societies.

Am I, the writer of this post, an anarchist? Not in a universal sense, as I am a believer in The Lord Y’shua Hamashiach and in the One who sent Him, His Father, King of all those being called King, and Lord over all those being called Lord, and I understand the authority of the Highest-Heaven’s Supreme Ruler. But I am certainly skeptical towards the benefit of alleged authority of mankind over other members of mankind in a hierarchical structure of “The State.” I see the pattern of tyranny, theft and death by the hand of man’s government, which seems to repeatedly fall into satanic and devilish practices, as the Actors of government, if not corrupt and inept from the start, are saturated by such in the environment of politics. Governments, or the corporations pretending to be governments, are the largest and most pervasive criminal organizations on earth, even if just through murder of millions by way of propagandized and orchestrated illegal mercenary conflicts alone, which they market as “wars of a noble soldiery;” and the governments exploit people to do this, usually good hearted and courageous people. Afterwards, these people are often discarded or disposed of. To State Actors, you are a tool to be expended and used. “Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” -Attributed to Henry Kissinger.

Government is instituted by people for the benefit of people, to aid in securing their unalienable rights, and as may be necessary, to operate in international business. A government, or its Actors, being the men and women who animate government (as “government” is a dead legal entity) need not be perfect, but are ideally shackled in their potential for malfeasance by contract: A constitution. The Constitutions of/for the United States of America are common law contracts that constrain government actors from tyranny, and that also hinder people from throwing more freedom away by handing additional powers to those previously enumerated for government actors. The People have been, in general, derelict in their duty of holding government to its contract. Government does not exist to benefit government and its Actors and puppet-masters, although this is being allowed by the nonfeasance of the masses through not holding government Actors accountable. Hopefully, the general populace shall arise, and claim what already belongs to them: Freedom, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and to find out who they are in Christ Jesus.

-Without Prejudice, T. Jas. J, AKA: The Mad Mainer