Someone pointed out that my concept of the anti-government is similar to Sam Francis' concept of anarcho-tyranny. An anarcho-tyranny is a situation in which government multiplies crimes for ordinary people while letting traditional criminals walk. His prime example is gun control: the government tries to make gun ownership a crime while not doing much to stop violent crime because ordinary people are easier to control. Anarcho-tyranny is a sort of bait-and-switch, making it look like the government is doing something by doing nothing.
Another reason for anarcho-tyranny is the need to habituate citizens to ever more passive roles before the government, culture, and the economy, handing control over to the managerial class.
I think anti-government is a little different: rather than ignore chaos as in anarcho-tyranny, the anti-government intentionally causes it. Anti-government isn't about so much about control as it is about revolutionary destruction. The anarcho-tyrant doesn't want crime in cities, he just tolerates it, while the anti-government wants more crime because it is a means to an end. The goal may be to terrorize his political opponents or it may be a utopian faith that once the social order is destroyed something good will come out it.
WordPress.com
No comments:
Post a Comment