Statism vs Anarchism?

[Dr. Who]

Statism is generally defined as:
The belief that the state should control either economic or social policy, or both, to some degree.

Anarchism is generally defined as:
A libertarian political philosophy that advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. These are often described as stateless societies, although several authors have defined them more specifically as institutions based on non-hierarchical free associations. Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful.

So, is the state inherently a bad idea or conversely is anarchism, the precursor to the state, even workable in a world with a population of 7,484,325,476 people? Is anarchism from a practical perspective really a direct democracy?

Discuss.

[pjohns]

Statism is generally defined as:
The belief that the state should control either economic or social policy, or both, to some degree.

Anarchism is generally defined as:
A libertarian political philosophy that advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. These are often described as stateless societies, although several authors have defined them more specifically as institutions based on non-hierarchical free associations. Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful.

So, is the state inherently a bad idea or conversely is anarchism, the precursor to the state, even workable in a world with a population of 7,484,325,476 people? Is anarchism from a practical perspective really a direct democracy?

Discuss.

Perhaps "statism" is inadequate to describe this phenomenon.

The Wikipedia article to which you have linked also states the following:

"Statism can take many forms from minarchism to totalitarianism. Minarchists prefer a minimal or night-watchman state to protect people from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud with military, police, and courts.^[5] Some may also include fire departments, prisons, and other functions.^[5] The welfare state and other moderate levels of statism also exist on the scale of statism.^[6][7] Totalitarians prefer a maximum or all-encompassing state.^[8][9]"

It is in the second and third incarnations (the welfare state and totalitarianism) that most of us oppose statism.

[Chris]

Anarchism is not precursor to statism.

"Homo sapiens has been around for something like 200,000 years. States were only "invented" roughly five thousand years ago, and until about a thousand years ago most of humankind lived outside anything that could be called a state." (James C Scott, Two Cheers for Anarchy)

The modern meaning of anarchy was first employed by Pierre J. Proudhon in 1840 in What is Property?

What is to be the form of government in the future? I hear some of my younger readers reply: "Why, how can you ask such a question? You are a republican." "A republican! Yes; but that word specifies nothing. Res publica; that is, the public thing. Now, whoever is interested in public affairs -- no matter under what form of government -- may call himself a republican. Even kings are republicans." -- "Well! you are a democrat?" -- "No." -- "What! you would have a monarchy." -- "No." -- "A constitutionalist?" -- "God forbid!" -- "You are then an aristocrat?" -- "Not at all." -- "You want a mixed government?" -- "Still less." -- "What are you, then?" -- "I am an anarchist."

"Oh! I understand you; you speak satirically. This is a hit at the government." -- "By no means. I have just given you my serious and well-considered profession of faith. Although a firm friend of order, I am (in the full force of the term) an anarchist. Listen to me."

[Dr. Who]

Anarchism is not precursor to statism.

"Homo sapiens has been around for something like 200,000 years. States were only "invented" roughly five thousand years ago, and until about a thousand years ago most of humankind lived outside anything that could be called a state." (James C Scott, Two Cheers for Anarchy)

The modern meaning of anarchy was first employed by Pierre J. Proudhon in 1840 in What is Property?

Precursor just means what came before. Anarchism is considered to be the opposite of statism, so the world before states was by definition anarchistic.

[Chris]

Precursor just means what came before. Anarchism is considered to be the opposite of statism, so the world before states was by definition anarchistic.

It came after. Your definition is anachronistic.

[Dr. Who]

Perhaps "statism" is inadequate to describe this phenomenon.

The Wikipedia article to which you have linked also states the following:

"Statism can take many forms from minarchism to totalitarianism. Minarchists prefer a minimal or night-watchman state to protect people from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud with military, police, and courts.^[5] Some may also include fire departments, prisons, and other functions.^[5] The welfare state and other moderate levels of statism also exist on the scale of statism.^[6][7] Totalitarians prefer a maximum or all-encompassing state.^[8][9]"

It is in the second and third incarnations (the welfare state and totalitarianism) that most of us oppose statism.

However, there are those that reject any and all states and think that mankind can thrive without any state at all. I think we have representation from all forms of statists and anarchists on this forum. That's basically the reason for the OP - to better understand the what we mean when we use the terminology.

[Dr. Who]

It came after. Your definition is anachronistic.

So pre-state society was not anarchistic? Is that your position?

[Chris]

So pre-state society was not anarchistic? Is that your position?

Correct, for 98% of our existence, we were stateless. See Scott above.

[Dr. Who]

Correct, for 98% of our existence, we were stateless. See Scott above.

However, you would not characterize that pre-state condition as anarchism? What then was it?

[Chris]

However, you would not characterize that pre-state condition as anarchism? What then was it?

Come on! Stateless. Statism is stateful.