Goldman and Anarchism

In her article, Goldman defines Anarchism to be “the philosophy of a new social order based on liberty unrestricted by man-made law; the theory that all forms of government rest of violence, and are therefore wrong and harmful, as well as unnecessary.” She believes that Anarchism frees man from enslavement, entities that bear a horrific dominance: Religion, Property, and Government. I think her definition of Religion is focused more on the Christian basis, she makes religion sound unpleasant by generalizing in one group, but I because religion doesn’t necessarily have to dominate a person, rather it could be their lifestyle like Veganism for example; people have the freedom to follow or reject it. It seems that today, especially in America, people have the freedom to practice their “Religious” doctrines.

Government is described as an unjust, slave-driving “machine,” an uncaring robber. How would this be harmful for a contactualist society, if everyone agrees to the rules?

Observing human nature is analogous to animals in captivity because both undertake suffering in cages, unable to act upon their full potential. It seems that Goldman sees people as good in themselves, that things will become orderly by themselves. By resisting and defying “all laws and restrictions, economic, social, and moral,” I can’t imagine there being order because people will always disagree amongst each other publicly and privately.

“A perfect personality is only possible in a state of society where a man is free to choose the mode of work, conditions of work, and the freedom to work,” but if that is the case, everyone will want to be a firefighter or something glamorous. No one will want to be a janitor, or a doctor who gets paid the same amount as the janitor.