Can You Resist 'Utopia' & 'Escapism'?
Can You Resist 'Utopia' & 'Escapism'?
These Frequent Criticisms Against Anarchism Have Also Been Aimed at Christianity
Raise your hand if anyone has ever told you that anarchism is a fantasy in which people try to escape the realities of society and the world.
David Gornoski of “A Neighbor’s Choice” and I discussed this in his podcast episode released Jan. 25. I heartily recommend hearing the full, vibrant conversation at A Neighbor's Choice website, Rumble, YouTube, Apple, Podbean, Podcast Addict, Podchaser, and Spotify.
I’ll highlight some of my remarks in this article.
David asked me about the perception that anarchists are weak for wanting to be, essentially, left alone by those with more collectivist ideologies. I replied that we’re meek, not weak:
Meek people are strong people. … We can appear weak because we’re not dominating others, we’re not trying to impose ourselves on others, but there’s a strength there.
And people who are only looking at the power structures and the social status, they might miss the fact that there are black markets going on, there’s agorism going on. There are plenty of people undermining … the imposed order.
I made a similar point in Chapter 3 of my book, writing that the Beatitudes call us to “meekness (not the same as weakness, though!).”
Utopian? Escapist?
Those of you who are …
homeschooling,
growing/raising your own food,
seeking/providing healthcare outside of the Medical Industrial Complex,
using non-Overton Window sources of news and analysis (hey, you’re reading one right now!),
creating businesses that offer alternatives to popular (and often crony!) brands,
trading via extra-government mediums/methods,
and doing any other activity that eschews or undermines the dull, shallow, parasitic mainstream culture,
… know that to succeed is anything but weak!
Nor is it utopian, another charge often leveled at anarchism.
If anything, government is utopian! Really, there's no evidence in the present nor past of a monopoly-violence institution meting out justice according to any uniform, humane standard, nor achieving true peace, nor true security. Government is too idealized to work, heh!
How about the charge of escapism? Aren’t anarchists trying to get out of the responsibilities of society?
Quite the opposite: People who build alternatives to the imposed, hierarchical social order and its approved institutions are taking more responsibility for their interactions than if they weakly outsourced their responsibility to official channels.
Similar ignorant shots taken at Christianity
Anarchism, in short, is misunderstood in these common criticisms. Real anarchy works, when tried.
And the same is true of emulating Christ to the best of our abilities.
The Early Church — which followed an anarchist political model — succeeded, despite persecutions and rejecting monopoly-violence pursuits. It was only impractical if you looked at it through the lens of government, as I remarked:
If Jesus had marched in with a rival army, they would’ve known how to deal with Him. But He didn’t do that, and they couldn’t figure Him out. Jesus is good chaos. Jesus brings good chaos to a bunch of control-freaks and order-worshipers, and they can’t figure out what to do with Him.
So, the Early Church knew their way of life was neither weak, nor utopian, nor escapist, nor irresponsible.
But do modern Christians embrace this good struggle, or are too many of them more comfortable with Constantine’s pagan model of Church (which I bash in Chapter 1 of my book)? Are they simply waiting for the afterlife, where they believe they’ll spend eternity in Heaven? As I tried to describe during an especially lively podcast portion:
There’s also a tendency for Christians to want to escape the cross and the persecution and the passion and death [of Jesus], and get right to the resurrection. But … there are beautiful lessons [in the Way of the Cross], and they teach us about our lives now.
Yes, there is hope in the resurrection. But before that, there is beauty and grit in a profoundly unpopular, faithful-to-Christ, earthly life. It’s a hugely important theme in my book, one that I hope readers have noticed (and I hope I did a good enough job of presenting it!).
Embrace — don’t escape, heh — the chance to share
If you’ve tried moving away from mainstream systemization and toward more decentralized alternatives, what’s been your experience? What criticisms have you faced? Utopian? Escapist? Weak? Impractical?
What else interests you about this article’s themes?
I’m interested in your thoughts …
“there is beauty and grit in a profoundly unpopular, faithful-to-Christ, earthly life. It’s a hugely important theme in my book, one that I hope readers have noticed (and I hope I did a good enough job of presenting it!).”
You absolutely did do a good job representing this theme in your book! : )
My greatest concern about much internet “anarchism” is that a lot of it is tied/connected to the Mises Institute and some of the most extreme cases of tribalism I’ve ever witnessed on such a small scale. Volunteers within this anti-system might be inclined to control all aspects of the philosophy in monopolistic ways. I’ve witnessed countless signs of it firsthand. And if that becomes a widespread factor as the philosophy gains momentum, how long before black markets and agorism become corrupted like the federal government and central bank?