Most common usage of the word “anarchy” is to denote chaos or bad things. The goal of Anarcho-Buddy is to demonstrate that this shouldn’t be the case; that anarchism is peaceful and non-threatening, much like a buddy. For when we think of what is required for a minimum level of civility, they are very same moral principles taught in kindergarten or even earlier (“don’t hit, don’t steal”). These principles can be more generally stated as: don’t initiate force against another’s person or property. This is the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP).
Now, most of us overwhelmingly conform to this principle in our personal lives. When we want something someone else owns, we buy or trade for it; we don’t just take it. If we want to pursue a relationship with someone else, we ask them for their friendship; we don’t hold a gun to their head to make them hang out with us. If we desire to change someone’s mind about something, we try to persuade them through reason and so forth; we don’t put them in a re-education camp. When we think about it, it is only right that human interaction be free from aggression; that human relationships should be voluntary.
This shouldn’t be a revelation to anyone so far, but simply common sense. It is also common sense that moral principles should apply to everyone. This means that it is wrong for any person or groups of persons to aggress against another’s person or property. This is where the “Anarcho-” prefix comes in.
The etymology of the suffix “-archy” comes from the Latin “-archia,” meaning leader or ruler. Accordingly, “-archy” refers to a form of government or rule. Monarchy is rule by one, oligarchy is rule by few; anarchy is rule by none. The question is, why would you, as a responsible and rational individual, need to be ruled by someone else? Surely you can voluntarily follow a leader, such as in the context of an exercise class, but being ruled is involuntary. In fact, all actions by governments, are involuntary and therefore violate the Non-Aggression Principle.
Hence, it is the contention of this blog that the institution of coercive government is illegitimate because it violates principles we hold to be moral in our personal lives. An act done by an individual that is immoral, such as theft, is not made moral when done by a government agent and called “taxation.” Therefore, we see anarchism as the logical conclusion of holding coercion to be wrong and the proper application of the golden rule (note how anarchism does not mean no rules, but actually no ruler. In fact, anarchism is the philosophy that takes following rules and the rule of law seriously).
I would like to change the image garnered in people’s minds when they think of what an anarchist is. Instead of a balaclava wearing molotov thrower, one should see a peaceful and peace-loving individual who believes in the universal application of moral principles.