Anarchism Is Closer To Liberalism Than It Is Socialism" Discuss.

"Anarchism is closer to liberalism than it is socialism" Discuss. [45] To establish whether anarchism is more similar to either liberalism or socialism we must understand the extent to which these ideologies share core beliefs and values. Anarchism has been defined by a strong belief in anti-statism, derived from a negative principle of authority, as well as a belief in both personal and economic freedom. There is undoubtedly a degree of overlap between these and core liberal and socialist beliefs. Anarchism can, therefore, be said to occupy a middle ground wherein both socialism and liberalism reach their anti-statist conclusions. Anarchism can be aptly described as both "ultra-liberalism" and "ultra-socialism" depending upon the tract of anarchism one is assessing; collectivist or individualist. Individual autonomy has defined individualist anarchism; individualist anarchists hold many of the same beliefs as liberal individualists, although they have progressed many of their common beliefs to their extremes. Key thinkers such as William Godwin (1836) have outlined individualistic anarchism as essentially an extreme form of classical liberalism. Both anarchist and liberals hold the individual to be of paramount importance. They assert that individual sovereignty should be at the heart of any society and that no restrictions on personal autonomy should exist. Furthermore, both ideologies share the belief that constraint on individual autonomy is evil, regardless of its origins. Anarchists have asserted that such restrictions are imposed by a sovereign state as a coercive and compulsory body. Liberals do not entirely reject this position, and therefore have an anti-statist vein. Finally individualist anarchists have drawn upon the ideas of economic liberalism to form their economic theory. Individualistic anarchists have advocated an unbridled free market as an extension of their belief in personal autonomy. They argue this market should be free of any constraint, especially from the government. They also support the existence of private property and personal acquisition; this has been described as anarcho-capitalism, within which there would be no provision of "public goods" or services, but only the determining forces of the free-market. Overall individualist anarchists remain closer to classical liberalism [who reject a concept of welfarism and instead advocate a "Night watchman state"] due to their belief in negative freedoms rather than the positive freedoms that might be provided by a large interventionist state. Despite the closeness of the two strands; classical liberalism and individualist anarchists disagree over the necessity of any state. Such is the anarchist's positive view of human nature that they reject the classical liberal view that a minimal state is necessary to ensure order, and prevent self-seeking individuals from exploiting others. This rejection is on the basis of any form of state being contrary to anarchistic anti-statism and their negative principle of authority Finally, liberals believe that constitutionalism in liberal democracy can "tame" government power which is contrary to the anarchist belief that any degree of power corrupt absolutely. Anarchists reject the assertion that government authority can be kept in check by frequent and competitive elections, as they argue that any degree of power can corrupt absolutely. An ultra-optimistic view of human nature has defined collectivist anarchism. Collectivist Anarchism is based on a principle of human nature; and has become a developed strand of anarchism. Bakunin (1973) described "social solidarity" as the first human law. This means that human beings, first and foremost desire harmony and fraternity with other people. This theory of the "authentic self " i.e. the natural status quo of human nature has therefore been tainted by the capitalist system, which encourages competition and subversion of others, as well as the coercive and oppressive nature of the state. Collectivist anarchists have argued for a communitarian society on the basis of their beliefs about human nature. They see human beings as social creatures that are sympathetic, affectionate and co-operative. Anarchist arguments in favour of the construction of a stateless society have been based on the anti-statist principle common to both collectivist and individualists. They state that by replacing social and economic freedom with coercive control of the population the state makes the social solidarity, which collectivist anarchist and socialists desire, impossible. On these grounds both Collectivist anarchism and socialist, especially classical Marxists and Orthodox socialists, reach the same anti-statist conclusion. Furthermore, collectivist anarchist and socialist have shared a belief in collective ownership. Collectivist anarchists have argued against private property as they belief it is a manifestation of the capitalist system and only encourages selfishness and competition [contrary to human nature] and that a system of collective ownership should be established. Mutualism is an economic principle closely linked to a belief in economic collectivism as it is a system of exchange whereby goods are traded on the basis of the amount of labour required to produce them and a system of currency is not used. Although socialists have argued in favour of collective ownership on the grounds of increased economic efficiency, they reach the same conclusions as collectivist anarchists on the fashion in which society should manage resources and property. Anarchists, particularly collectivists, and socialist diverge on a number of issues; the first of which it the means by which their common utopian ends should be achieved. Anarchist are not inherently adverse to violent overthrown of government, as they have followed courses of violence, direct action and non-violence, but they are strongly opposed to the establishment of any form of political order. They disagree, therefore with the socialist principle of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" [an intermediary government established by the revolutionary party to secure the gains of a successful revolution which will eventually "wither away" into the new utopian society]. Classical and orthodox socialists, as fundamentalist support the theory of a dictatorship of a proletariat, and therefore diverge from the belief of collectivist anarchists as they argue that such and institution contradicts the anarchist belief in anti-statism and the evil and oppressive nature of all states. A further point of diverge between collectivist anarchist and socialist has been their respective theories of the capitalist system. Anarchists are adverse to state intervention in any form as they reject the state outright, whereas democratic socialists have argued that the state can be used to reform or "humanise" capitalism and harness its potential to create wealth and bring greater equality and social justice. This is, therefore, contrary to the anarchist's negative principle of authority. Whether or not it can reasonably be concluded that anarchism is closer to either socialism or liberalism depends upon the degree to which anarchism departs from the core values of each ideology. Individualist anarchists shared significant conceptual features with liberal, especially classical liberals, in that they both advocate unrestrained personal freedom, both socially and economically. Furthermore they agree upon the various equalities that should afforded individuals, namely foundational equality and a meritocratic society. But they disagree upon the necessity of a minimal state to ensure order as well as the capacity of constitutionalism to limit governmental sovereignty and render it non-oppressive. Due to the integral nature of anti-statism to anarchism, the liberal attitude toward the state represents a significant divergence from anarchist ideas, and perhaps serves as evidence that anarchism is closer to socialism. Despite this anarchism is not entirely in agreement with the various ideas of socialism. Democratic socialists have argued that the state can be used effectively to "humanise" the capitalist system, without bringing about the social injustices which both Marxists and anarchists have attacked. Furthermore, collectivist anarchists have argued against the socialist theory of a "dictatorship of the proletariat", but overall these differences represent a less significant compromise upon the core principles of anarchism than a comparison with liberalism. This is because the practical implications of a disagreement over the classical Marxist theory of "the dictatorship of the proletariat" are arguably less significant than over the existence of a long-term constitutional government with which anarchists fundamentally disagree. It is logical to conclude, therefore, that anarchism is closer to socialism than it is liberalism.