But the burden of proof for any exercise of authority is always on the person exercising it - invariably. And when you look, most of the time these authority structures have no justification: they have no moral justification, they have no justification in the interests of the person lower in the hierarchy, or in the interest of other people, or the environment, or the future, or the society, or anything else - theyre just there in order to preserve certain structures of power and domination, and the people at the top. So I think that whenever you find situations of power, these questions should be asked - and the person who claims the legitimacy of the authority always bears the burden of justifying it. And if they cant justify it, its illegitimate and should be dismantled. To tell you the truth, I dont really understand anarchism as being much more than that. As far as I can see, its just the point of view that says that people have the right to be free, and if there are constraints on that freedom then youve got to justify them. Sometimes you can - but of course, anarchism or anything else doesnt give you the answers about when that is. You just have to look at the specific cases. - Noam Chomsky
Posted on: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:00:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015