I have been accused by none other than my mother of being pessimistic. I think I can understand where she is coming from. The problem is that she is not picking up what I’m laying down.

It is important to understand the way I perceive humanity. I’m under the distinct impression that every human born has both a bad side and a good side. Obviously, the dialectic between these two sides creates the synthesis of what we are. We can observe the human possesion of these opposites. One human can live a normal, productive life without any outside signs of extreme violence and then crack. After the agression has subsided the same individual may never show signs of violence again. We should view this as the potential for degradation in human nature. On the other hand, many examples of the average Joe going about his business and under some extreme circumstance he reacts in a heroic manner. Only to decisively fade back to his normal existence once the situation has subsided. Both examples show the human ability or potential to be both good or bad. These same two qualities can co-exist within the same individual and in some degree do within us all. Understanding this potential, namely that we are all potential murderers and heroes, is why I choose to believe that given the opportunity humans will react in a way that is logical and good. I believe that every one of us is capable of being the most vile criminal and at the same time the most devine of all individuals.

Anarchy is an agreement. I agree to allow everyone else the right to act as they seem best fit and in return everyone else must afford me the same right. This is a risky proposition. It is furling our want for stability and predictability out the window in hopes that if allowed, we humans will react in a logical and good way. The beauty of such an agreement is the ability for each situation to be handle by those involved. Allowing people, not a system of rules, to judge and act in a way they deem appropriate. We can then choose for ourselves what society we will have, for we can choose and how and with whom we will interact. Anarchy is allowing the individual to be sovereign. In all truth, the individual is the only truly sovereign entity because only individuals possess the ability to act.

If Anarchy is self-governance than communism is the economic system that accompanies it. Communism is an economic system where the people (not the government, that is socialism) owns and shares the means, distribution and profits of production. By eliminating the government from the equation, we can choose where, how, and with whom we will trade. There is no real need for the excess we create within the system of capitalism. More importantly it is unethical that excess and luxury is only created on one side of the equation, the side that is consuming. I believe that if we bring consumption and production to a personal level the interaction can and will be advantageous to both sides. Thus solving the problems created by the mass consumption and production of goods.

All in all, I beleive we have a good system but believe we are capable of a much better system. Ralph Waldo Emmerson, in “New England Reformers,” argues that if part of a system is bad than the whole is flawed. I believe we should be attempting to progress towards Utopia.