Anarchism, the dead and broken horse, incapable of recognizing its own post-life beatings, still rides along, somehow. While I’ve no issue with Anarchy, ‘Anarchism’, as an overly-principled, theoretical, armchair philosophy, is riddled with so many things that’ve no anarchic qualities about them. One of these things, or subjects, is the heavily dichotomized Order vs Chaos fuckfest that typically weighs in favor of societal order.
Order, as they will say, is the natural state of Anarchy, and vise-versa. That Anarchy is the mother of order because of cooperation, horizontal relations, organization, and so on. Then, of course, you have the new crowd. The ‘anarcho-capitalists’ and agorists who rant on about how big daddy state violated them and go on about how taxation is theft. They, too, preach about their beloved order. However, whereas traditional anarchists critique not just state but all authoritarian and hierarchical structures, the new breed of order-lovers worship the opposite. They believe that voluntarily engaging in hierarchical and authoritarian structures is the true anarchy. So long as you don’t mind deepthroating some boots and saying “spank me harder” along the way. The commonalities, considering their contrasting outlooks, are an indicator of how superficial anarchism can truly be.
Both of these groups might as well be sitting at the same imaginary tea party. Let them squabble over whose principles, morals, and economic preferences are better. One thing, however, that is abundantly clear within both of these ‘schools,’ is that they both praise order to some degree. They will tell you that the state is violence and therefore chaos. That the coercion, extortion, and ominous presence of the state entity is inherently chaotic, and that order is salvation. Now, it would seem that both of these, order and chaos, are entirely subjective, if not abstract and silly. One man’s order is another’s chaos and so on. But these order elitists lay it down and its not to be discussed or opposed.
The state using violence and coercion to maintain its status, to me, is a perfect example of order. An order maintained via what some see as chaotic means, but still an order. Cops violently attacking protesters is about bringing law and order to the region. Prisons maintain compliance. Educational institutions keep the masses on the same, boring, horribly written page. Societal stability must be maintained. The face of order is not to be disturbed. That ever-looming order that threatens to degrade, imprison, or execute you should you confront its structure. This is where the moderators of order must engage in what some call chaos. It has to save face and maintain status quo. Order cannot be interrupted. A disrupted and changing order borders too closely to chaos. Whereas chaos can invite change, order has a fixed normalization. To change, adapt, evolve; These are things that most orders simply cannot tolerate. And this is not exclusive to governing entities. It is prevalent in religion, socialization, families, etc. Order(s) excel at repressing the individual by pushing conformity and herdism. There is no room for individuality in any fixed mode of living.
But, of course, someone could bring my argument to the ground in their head by using their prescribed notions of chaos and order. That the state is inherently chaotic in its intervention in civilian lives and that only voluntary cooperation is true order. That’s the laugh of it all. As if anyone’s opinion on the subject matters. Here, however, is where anarchists, of all brands, tend to draw parallels with the state entity that they all oppose.
Plenty of anarchists reject chaos as it may be too disruptive. Unpredictable. Their society must be maintained. Their principles, institutions, culture(s), rules, etc. … Sounds very similar to something else I’ve mentioned. But Chaos! That fickle beast. Cast it aside lest we give way to a wildness. A wildfire spreading in savagery and disorderly-like conduct. Only in order can we trust. For without same-ness, how shall we ever live? Many conventional anarchists seek to disrupt order, somehow, with more order. I mean who wants to eat the exact same meal every fucking day for the rest of their life?
If order is the maintenance of the norm; Of pro-societal ways and tendencies that seek to maintain an artificial entity with which to live and abide by, well, count me right the fuck out. It is same-ness preserved. Mundane and bleak existences propagated and praised for keeping the same the same. Giving in to the multitude of abstract concepts so that all can feel safe and cozy. And that’s not for me.
Of course there’s fairy tales and war stories passed down of radical, communal living. Of comradery. Sure, take that. But when your anarchism develops, either in theory or in reality, into something that stigmatizes Chaos, spontaneity, wildness, then I’ll not remained interested. What is anarchy if not exactly all that, and more? The complete, unhindered expression of one’s self and emotions? The exploration beyond the abstract and the true, free existence in which no bounds are laid down upon, especially those of ‘order.’ If order is that which molds the individual, then it surely cannot be anarchic in any sense. In its own way, it becomes a ruler. “Rules, not rulers,’ some will loudly exclaim, as if social structures, codes, and methods of living are not rulers themselves; to be reinforced by ostracization and condemnation. Order requires a level of policing. No anarchists want to admit to that, but they would/will often times end up creating their own police forces, cleverly disguised as ‘community watch’, ‘protectors,’ or whatever so long as it sounds nice. Order needs its own rules and therefore its own authority(ies). Arguing otherwise will eventually lead you down into the rabbithole of unrestrained, ungoverned living. And then you may be looking that monster, chaos, in the eyes before you ever make it out.
This is why I propose, and intentionally mis-spell, Kaos. A new chaos. One without the implied stigmas and boundaries. Individualistic, animalistic, and certainly not of a kind to pander to notions of order, fall into the old debate, or give way to the morals of order. In a wildness without dualism or implied dichotomy. In an existence that only you can seek to define, should you choose to do so. While others debate what true ‘order’ and ‘chaos’ are, it only seems fitting to kaotically reject all their silly notions and self-righteous principles. To refute subjugation and mental damning outside of convention. For me, it is an active rejection of all that seeks to claim dominion over me and embracing spontaneity and a free, feral-like nature. For you, it may be denying labor and getting drunk. Or perhaps a naked hike through the woods. Maybe it’s punching a cop, fascist, and random bookchinite. One thing is clear. No societal or other self-opposing order should ever be catered to. Not in justifications, codes, boundaries. That is my notion of Kaos. For you, it may be different. All I know is this. Kaos, as a true expression of self and opposition to order, should not make itself such a definable concept as the old chaos. It should not be stifled, subjugated, or slain by those who worship order. It is a beast of self-expression, action, and thought that shall bring down all that seeks to control to its fucking knees. A means of taking back one’s own life. Let’s give order the proper send off it needs, to nothingness, and embrace a wild, self-made Kaos.
For the Kaos!