Sociology of the Anarchists - Gozips.uakron.edu - The University of ...

they will not rebel. This is a fiercely anarchist argument—the state, patriarchy, and
capitalism working to diminish the desire for freedom in people. The other side of the
coin suggests that the more say the one has in their life, the happier, more fulfilled, and
more empowered they will become... an anarchist existence truly! Thus, anarchists once
again accept multiple reasons as the explanation for the lack of open rebellion in the US –
both subtle propaganda/socialization and less-than-subtle repression.
Anarcha-feminists would argue that many feminists are already anarchists (they tend to
resist authority and seek collective liberation). According to Farrow (2002): “Feminism
practices what anarchism preaches. One might go as far as to claim feminists are the only
existing protest groups that can honestly be called practicing Anarchists” (p. 15). Thus,
the ideas offered by Joan Huber about gender stratification come as no surprise. Huber
saw that some societies had more equal rewards between genders than others. In fact, the
most equal societies were those in which there was the least restriction on women
working outside their homes (and away from child rearing). The ability of women to be
autonomous in their actions was key to their equality in rewards, compared to men. Huber
does not seem to always state this, in particular in observing the growing equality in the
late industrial period and seeing various technological enhancements (she borrowed from
Lenski) as the facilitators of this equality as opposed to increased political equality or the
feminist movement. (BUT, I COULD BE WRONG)
If conflict theory points towards the collective side of anarchism—arguing for class
war/struggle, solidarity, collective resistance, communism—then utilitarianism, in
perhaps less of a strong way, points towards the individual side of anarchism. This
includes the need for self-determination, the free will of individuals, and personal
freedoms. Yet, the coldness of utilitarianism is usually predicated on the notion of an
economic exchange, devoid of deeper concerns. Not to say that all things being
exchanged are economic in nature, but that the exchange is conducted as if it were in a
market place.
However, it needs to be restated that anarchists do not share the assumption of utilitarian
thinking that says that individuals in pursuit of personal interests and utility will create a
better society. They do however accept (in part) the classic Liberal desire to expand
individual liberties (but place that expansion within the confines of collective unity and
freedom). 28 How humans choose to act collectively is based on the idea of voluntary
association, not coercion.
Given that individuals are self-interested, how do they behave socially/collectively?
According to utilitarian thinking, they act only insofar as their interests lead them to. Why
do [some] people give up some of their autonomy and sovereignty? The answer offered is
usually that this allows people some control over others' autonomy.
Mancur Olson points to the “free rider problem” as a case where some enjoy public goods
with no personal cost. The paradox is why would people contribute to a public cost when
28 See the Appendix's “Individual/Collective” model for more on this premise.
[ Williams 26 ] [ this is a draft. do not cite. ]