ON THEE NATURE OF ANARCY




   
       Aristotle. in his treatise on politics..trests four ways of government in their development. First is monarchy which is followed by oligarchy then Democracy and finally Anarchy.
       It is relatively easy  to observe the logical progressions monarchy indicates the ruler of one..while an oligrgy admits a shared government..by  few. These rulers..who must become corrupt..like the monarch before..should likewise be disposed of..by the rabble..who make up the majority of the people and are then given to form a Democracy.
       When Plato first spoke of a Democracy..he made note that if the community exceded 100 people. The said Democracy would not work. This leads to a breakdown of organization and laws..which introduces an absence of government..which is the definition of Anarchy.
       But what exactly is the nature of Anarchy? Well..at best. Confusion. Since the previous governments did not function, there was hope in a collective vision,,,but
 how can you satisfy all the people? Essentially you can't and this creates a weakness in the central powers. Perhaps there is justice only foe the few. But at least there is justice. The rest may be held in check by a police state. But that an be infiltrated or subdued. Until neither knows which one is  fighting for the just cause. Thus the whole2 fabric which had held them together..unrolls until it is left by only threads  of its former composure. This is the beginngof Anarchy and if the police state doesn't work,..then perhaps a dictator is in order. This brings us back to the quasi state of Monarchy once again. But while no government is available..chaos must rule and this is  most detrimental to mankind.
       Then. What makes mankind? Is it not the kernel of the very Anarchy. Which is the seed of its own destruction?
       What then is the definition of destruction? Is if all mental or physical?
       Of necessity. It's physical. It must be for the five senses are trained for survival. The sixth sense..scientifically not available. Might still exist
       Anarchy then..breeds destruction. For it is amorphous and without law or justice. The laws and justice which formally existed in the other forms of government are refuted for they represent what is now despised..but if you have nothing you entreat destruction.
       Alas that is he nature of Anarchy. But what is the solution to the problem?. I believe justice. In the Pentatarch it is written..."And you shall have judges over you.." In another section it states.."you will have judges over the ten thousand..the thousand and the hundred.." But what are judges..if not people who carry out the laws? And what good are the laws ..if they are not inclusive? The Decalogue remains the basis for all inclusive law..which pretend to represent a jus form of government for mankind. They are divided into two groups. One is for the Creator and the other five pertain to the behavior for any society.
       of course there are those who will say they don't believe in a Creator..so they will scrap the first five laws. Yet it does connect the abstract with the concrete and this latter is man. It seems to me that thus is necessary..for man is a composite. It may be true the greater part of him is material. Although this could be argued. Still..somewhere inside the individual rest a spiritual being. This is necessary to complete the balance. It could also represent a thread which directly or indirectly..creates a timeless tapestry called humanity.
       Perhaps we are condemned to commit ourselves to the cyclical changes of government on this planet..but Aristotle warned that Anarchy was the worst form of government. It follows that the answer must be justice. And if we would only consider those laws previously established in the Decalogue...we would know that it is not far away..rather close at hand