No Ruler. (Part 2)

Reject, resist, organize, work, oppose, and directly confront.

These are the unifying goals of the RNC Welcoming Committee and at their root, admirable. I surfed their FAQ section and found references to the Anarchist FAQ online here. Which, to my understanding hopes to see libertarian Socialism replace any and all systems of government.

Instead of "central planning," which many people associate with the word "socialism," These anarchists advocate free association and co-operation between individuals, workplaces and communities and so oppose "state" socialism. But there remains the collective ownership of production and the means of production. At least that is my present and far to brief summary.

However, this still seems like an upside hierarchy to me, even if from the ground up and if run by humans, prone to corruption. Not that anyone of these adherents would disagree. They might and counterclaim that their system still provides for the best and least destructive correction, being local, tribal, decentralized and by free association.

Self-management, All would agree but especially for anarchists, is essential to ensure freedom within the organisations so needed for any decent human existence.

And there is the rub. While I agree with a lot of what I read and continue to read among anarchists the essential point for me lies in the sinfulness of men. We seek to rule over the other. 'Archist', in a sense, that is make primary ourselves. We cannot remove that bent in our system even if we remove all the tools and positions of government. Ours is a self management problem.

As a Christian anarchist, I seek to make none Archy but God, God revealed in Jesus. Anything that attempts to fulfill that role must be confronted. Beginning primarily with myself.

The hope is not in deconstructing any system for anarchy's sake but for the Lord. The key ingredient in that struggle being the proclamation of the gospel through non-violent means. Precisely through non-violent means. A radical, self giving discipleship.

Which is why I must reject the anarchists of the welcoming party. While I may or may not agree with their assessment, I ultimately cannot join them. But nor must I then default to some political party, or the lesser of 2, 4, or 8 evils.

The commitment to the way overrides in all and that way is still one of direct confrontation with all archy's, all powers that set themselves up. But the righteousness of the way lays not even in being non-violent but in depending upon God in all things. A dependence on what He has, is and will do as I put myself into what some would declare as harms way.

I'll continue to try and expand upon this idea but one final comment for now.

Consider the protest in St. Paul itself. A few disrupted for many, a protest. Lets grant for the sake of argument that the free association of these people was noble and fair and just. It was reduced to violence by those within their own ranks. The noble aims of the organizing itself failed to protect from the few who made themselves an authority by breaking things and inviting violence in response. Would any society created by men do any better? Could guarantee against reaction and overreaction by parties within and those opposed? Did those who failed to heed the main groups warnings, against their own anarchist standards, set themselves up as their own authorities and ruin what was a collective ideal?

James 4:2 You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask.