top of page

The Logic of Anarchism

What is Anarchism?


If you search online for the meaning of the word "anarchy," you'll often find a definition like: "a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority." However, this definition is misleading and only captures the informal use of the term. The word "anarchy" actually comes from the Greek word "anarkhos" (ἄναρχος), which combines "an" (without) and "arkhos" (ruler). So, it literally means "without rulers."


Another definition, often overlooked but more accurate, refers to anarchy as "the absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal." When I refer to "anarchy," I mean a society without rulers—but not without structure or rules. "Anarchism," then, is the philosophy that explores how we can achieve true freedom without coercive authority. Remember, "anarchy" doesn't mean "without rules"; it means "without rulers."


Basic Moral Rules


To understand anarchism, we need to think about what the most basic moral rules are and how they relate to a society without rulers. Can we figure out these fundamental moral rules? Yes, and it all starts with the concept of property and ownership. It might sound strange—thinking about people as property—but it's actually crucial for understanding how respecting individual rights forms the foundation of a free society.


Property


When we talk about "property," we mean "something that belongs to someone." Knowing who owns what—and ensuring these decisions respect basic moral principles—is essential for a society to function well. As libertarian author Murray Rothbard once said,

"The key to the theory of liberty is the establishment of the rights of private property, for each individual's justified sphere of free action can only be set forth if his rights of property are analyzed and established."1

In other words, freedom requires clear property rights because crimes—like theft or assault—are really just violations of someone else's property rights.


Without the concept of ownership, discussions on moral rules become incoherent. For example, consider a personal item, like your favorite guitar. If you didn't own it, anyone could pick it up, use it, or even take it without your permission. You wouldn't be able to complain about it being damaged or taken away because, without ownership, no one is responsible for respecting your connection to it. Property rights help define boundaries and allow people to coexist peacefully by providing incentives to take care of and respect what belongs to others.


Scarcity


Economists recognize an important fact: human desires are unlimited, but resources are limited. This is what we call scarcity. Since resources are scarce—meaning that one person's use of a resource often prevents someone else from using it—we need to decide who has the rightful claim to a given resource.


Ludwig Von Mises explained it like this:

"The available supply of every commodity is limited. If it were not scarce with regard to the demand of the public, the thing in question would not be considered an economic good, and no price would be paid for it."2

Scarcity creates the need for ownership, which helps reduce potential conflict. Stephen Kinsella, an intellectual property lawyer, summed it up:

"The fundamental social and ethical function of property rights is to prevent inter-personal conflict over scarce resources."3

Similarly, economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe said:

"For a concept of property to arise, there must be a scarcity of goods. Should there be no scarcity, and should all goods be so-called 'free goods' whose use by any one person for any one purpose would not in any way exclude (or interfere with or restrict) its use by any other person or for any other purpose, then there would be no need for property." 4

For example, air is usually abundant, so we don't need to establish ownership over it since everyone can breathe without taking away from others. But most things—like cars, clothing, or laptops—are scarce. Realistically, only one person can use them at a time, which makes ownership necessary to prevent conflict.


Self-Ownership


The concept of property starts with self-ownership. Who owns you? The answer is simple: you do. Self-ownership means that you are the main owner of your body and the actions it takes. No one else has a better claim to your body. As John Locke said:

"Every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself."5

If you put effort into using unclaimed resources, you create something new—property that belongs to you. For instance, if you build a table from wood that no one has claimed, that table is yours because you put in the effort and skill to make it. Self-ownership, therefore, also extends to owning the results of your labour. This means that anything you create with your own effort, as long as it wasn't taken from someone else, belongs to you.


Rights


When we talk about "rights," we mean the things that a person can morally claim as their own, without interference. Rights come from self-ownership and are key to understanding moral boundaries. The idea of rights helps explain why murder, assault, and theft are wrong: they all involve taking something from someone without their consent, whether it's their life, body, or possessions.


Ayn Rand explained the link between rights and property:

"No human rights can exist without property rights. Since material goods are produced by the mind and effort of individual men, and are needed to sustain their lives, if the producer does not own the result of his effort, he does not own his life."6

Freedom vs. Coercion


True freedom means that no one takes your life, liberty, or property without your consent. Coercion, on the other hand, involves using force or the threat of force to take these things away from someone.7 To be truly free, we must live without coercion.


The Non-Aggression Principle


The core idea of anarchism is the non-aggression principle (NAP). As Rothbard said:

"The libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else." 8

Aggression means starting the use of physical force against others or their property, which goes against freedom. Anarchism supports a society where people interact based on voluntary cooperation instead of coercion.


The Free Market



In an anarchist society, people would still interact to meet their needs, but these interactions would be voluntary. The free market—based on voluntary exchange and mutual benefit—follows this principle. Rothbard put it simply:

"The free market is a society of voluntary and consequently mutually beneficial exchanges of ownership titles between specialized producers." 9

In such a society, people are free to create, trade, and grow without interference from rulers.


Conclusion


Anarchism is not about chaos or disorder—it is about a society without rulers, where individuals are free to govern themselves and interact voluntarily. By recognizing self-ownership, respecting property rights, and following the non-aggression principle, we can envision a society that values both freedom and cooperation. As Rothbard wrote:

"Men are born free, and need never be in chains."10

Footnotes:

1 Murray Newton Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty (New York: New York Univ. Press, 2002).

2 Ludwig Von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics (Mansfield Centre, Conn.: Martino, 2012).

3 N Stephan Kinsella, Against Intellectual Property (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig Von Mises Institute, 2008).

4 Hans-Hermann Hoppe and Von Mises, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (Auburn, Alabama: Mises Institute, 2016).

5 John Locke, Two Treatises of Government. (1689; repr., S.L.: Blurb, 2019).

6 Ayn Rand, The Ayn Rand Lexicon: Objectivism from A to Z (New York: Plume, 2014).

7 James A. Sadowsky, S.J., “Private Property and Collective Ownership,” in Tibor Machan, ed., The Libertarian Alternative (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1974), pp. 120–21.

8 Rothbard, Murray Newton. For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto. United States: Collier Books, 1978.

9 Murray Newton Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty (New York: New York Univ. Press, 2002).

10 Ibid.


bottom of page