Comparison Of Social And Individual Anarchy

Social and individual anarchy is the most extreme out of the widow of democracy and shows the most contrast to the democracy. Anarchy is a system composed of no government, individuals and groups are allowed to whatever they chose, as there are no laws set in place. Social and individual anarchy are on the respective left, and right extremes of the political spectrum; social anarchy being a political belief looking out for the collective group and individual anarchy being for the individual's pursuit. Anarchy is deemed beneficially as no one is set above one another, and no one can rule above you. Where this political belief spirals out of control is there are no rules, it is simply chaos. We see in disaster movies, and situations anarchy

In social anarchy, direct democracy is needed to make decisions for the collective, and the group must come to a consensus. This would never work in Canada, or any other country as people are so widespread, making decisions would be a disaster and nothing would ever progress. In a democracy, we have elected representatives voted into power based on the will of the population, to avoid this problem; society holds them to promises and if they do not put out, they will be reprimanded as they will not be voted back into power, consent of the governed provides this to the people. In anarchy, both social and individual, there are no rules to protect against the will of another person, and nothing will happen to the wrongdoer for causing another person harm; this can be scary as one is always on edge to what might happen if they aggravate the wrong person. Individual rights and freedoms of democracy protect one against this, as well as rule of law, in this example, these two core values play hand in hand with one another. Rule of law holds members of democracy accountable for their actions, and punishes them with outcasting of society, through jail or prison, if one decides to impeach upon another’s rights and freedoms, such as; the right to live without

The core values of democracy, (individual rights and freedoms, consent of the governed, limited government, and rule of law) of modern and classical liberalism are not present in the government ideologies explored within this essay, and those are the values that allow for an individual to be free. Democracy proves that when a society has structure, guaranteed rights and freedoms, the core values of liberalism, and the ability to choose one's life, the citizens live a more fulfilled life. This is proved in fascism, as those living under Hitler’s reign were subject to his ultimate power, same can be said for Stalin in the Soviet Union in both political regimes citizens lived in grueling conditions, work camps, secret police and a party elite were the norms of life. Anarchy allows for one to live an unruly life, in fear of one's fellow neighbor. Liberal democracy allows people to be provided for within their rights, create personal wealth, have a say in government, and it does this effectively and efficiently, contrasting the direct democracy of social anarchy. Democracy models a society where all people have equal rights, and chance to progress in life, unlike fascism as it favors an elite group and communism where everyone is equally poor. In summary in order to live a meaningful, equal, order obtaining