Anarchy refers to absence of government; while anarchy is often associated with extremists, it is a necessary tool for checking the excesses of society’s political leadership. Even with the constantly disappointing and corrupt leaders, human beings still vote for new leaders because they have been socialized to believe that governments are necessary for a peaceful society. On the other hand, anarchists argue that anarchy is the most obvious course of action as it will give human beings a chance to create a society they want instead of a society dictated by rules created by the minority rulers. Opponents of anarchy argue that the society will be thrown into chaos in case of anarchy. From analyzing Aristotle and Hobbes’ perspectives …show more content…
Aristotle’s Politics shows Aristotle’s perspective towards anarchy. Though, the Aristotle does not explicitly suggest that anarchy is conflictual, his ideology implies that he is against anarchy. Aristotle notoriously defended slavery when he said, “there must be a union of natural rule and a subject, that both may be preserved. For he who can foresee with his mind is by nature intended to be the lord and the master, and he who can work with his body is a subject” (Aristotle 26). In the above statement, Aristotle is arguing that a society can only be operational Surname 2 when there is a ruler and subjects that work towards attainment of their ‘similar’ goals. Aristotle asserts that the rulers have the capacity to come up with good plans, whereas the subjects are in charge of implementation, hence they can both work together towards achieving their mutual goals. Aristotle asserts that anarchy is conflictual when he uses the most cited reason that governance is necessary for the greater good of all (Aristotle 28). He argues that the state is a creation of nature, and human beings are naturally political in nature and they cannot exist without a state as they would be, “tribeless, lawless and hearthless one (Aristotle 28).” He