Anarchy as Consent: Or, Statism as Rape Culture

ekklesiagora (62)in #anarchism • 8 years ago (edited)

It should be no surprise that Donald Trump, the personification of rape culture, was elected President. Rape culture and statism are parallel cultural phenomena. Rape is sex without consent; the State is government without consent. The problem with American society is that its culture is predicated on violence rather than consent, whether you are talking about patriarchal, hyper-masculine rape culture or conservative statism and Alt-Right idiocy—rape culture and statist mindsets are entangled and inseparable. At root, there is no respect for consent in American culture. This is why rape culture is rampant. This is why anarchism is reviled. And this is why the most fascist, misogynistic, and rapey douchebag in history has been elected President. Trumpism is the political ideology of rape culture taken to its extreme, but all forms of statism rest on government without consent.

The problem with our society is that there is no anarchist culture in it. The average person is not familiar with consensus processes and the philosophy of consent. The average person in American society is alright with the philosophies of “majority rule” and “might is right.” Capitalism and the Nation State are based on these two statist principles—majority rule (republicanism) and might is right (capitalism). If the majority vote in favor of something, then it becomes the law. If two businesses compete against each other and the one can put the other out of business, then it is just the "survival of the fittest"—might is right and the employees of the other enterprise can be damned. If I can establish a monopoly through cutthroat competition and eliminating alternatives, then I have a right to force people to come to me alone for the product or service that I offer. This whole mindset jibes well with rape culture. In rape culture, other potential mates are viewed as competition and the female as a prize to be won. Anarchism, on the other hand, is based upon consensus and cooperation. This is the polar opposite of rape culture. Anarchists are the only people who actually reject rape culture. If you dislike rape culture but support the State, you need to realize that YOU are part of the problem.

Of course, this anarchist ethic of consent might require us to reevaluate our traditional conceptions of marriage and monogamy. Perhaps polyamory and free love jibes more with the anarchist philosophy. Monogamy is okay for anarchists if it is consensual. But that consent must be free, not pressured by slut-shaming or a culture that disapproves of women who sleep around. Sleeping around and pursuing every beautiful woman one sees is acceptable for men in our culture. It's even encouraged and male promiscuity is promoted and reinforced by popular media and entertainment. But that double standard needs to be abolished. This is not to say that women ought to sleep around, but merely to say they ought to be allowed to and they ought not be shamed for doing so. If one chooses monogamy, it ought to be because that seems to be the most rational and practical path for them in the pursuit of happiness. If they choose monogamy and marry as a contract to bind two individuals together exclusively in the hope of preventing the spread of STDs, then that monogamous relationship accords with anarchy. If they marry and the woman is bound to one man because she is regarded as the possession of her husband, then that monogamous relationship is not something that anarchists would respect. If people freely want to marry multiple partners, then there is no legitimate reason that they should be prohibited from doing so, as long as all parties are consenting adults. This, of course, means that woman would be liberated by an anarchist culture of consent, but it does not mean that promiscuity and free love would necessarily become the norm. In fact, many people (perhaps most) would still choose to remain relatively monogamous for practical reasons (e.g. comfort, safety, health).

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”—Thomas Jefferson (The Declaration of Independence)

Anarchism is based on the notion of individual sovereignty or “self-ownership”. That which most naturally belongs to a person is their own body. My body is my body. I cannot even speak of it without using terms of ownership. Your body is your body. And from this follows the notion of self-government, that each person should be allowed complete control of their own body with the sole exception that they mustn’t interfere with the equal liberty of every other person. In anarchist ethics, the law of equal liberty states that an individual should be able to do whatsoever he wants as long as he does not interfere with the equal liberty of others. Any arbitrary law or arbitrary government, therefore, can only be legitimate insofar as it is based on the consent of the governed. If the governed consent, then the government is really self-government: the form of government is anarchism. If the governed do not consent, then the form of government is illegitimate and statist.

Rape is a direct and egregious violation of the right of consent. Since the body is the most intimate possession that an individual has, rape is a very direct assault that violates anarchist ethics. In biblical law, marital rape is not a thing: the wife is the property of the husband, so he has the right to control her body. Rape culture is predicated on the assumption that women are objects, possessions, or property. At the same time, the State is simply a more indirect form of assault that is quite akin to rape. Statism (i.e. government without consent) is also a violation of self-ownership or individual sovereignty. If the State has the right to govern you without your consent, then it follows that the State owns you. Under statist forms of government, it is assumed that people are the property of the State. If the State can tell you what to do, then you are a slave—you are the property of the State.

Classical political theorists spoke of a social contract because they recognized that government could only be justified if it had the consent of the governed. But their theory of a social contract is empty. There is no legitimate social contract because the people have not consented to the form of government under which they live. So the classical theorists posited some sort of implicit social contract in which the people’s silence constitutes consent.

“Rousseau said truly: No one should obey a law to which he has not consented; and M. Rittinghausen too was right when he proved that in consequence the law should emanate directly from the sovereign, without the intermediary of representatives.
“But it was in the application that both these writers failed. With suffrage, or the universal vote, it is evident that the law is neither direct nor personal, any more than collective. The law of the majority is not my law, it is the law of force; hence the government based upon it is not my government; it is government by force.
“That I may remain free; that I may not have to submit to any law but my own, and that I may govern myself, the authority of the suffrage must be renounced: we must give up the vote, as well as representation and monarchy. In a word, everything in the government of society which rests on the divine must be suppressed, and the whole rebuilt upon the human idea of CONTRACT.
“When I agree with one or more of my fellow citizens for any object whatever, it is clear that my own will is my law; it is I myself, who, in fulfilling my obligation, am my own government.
“Therefore if I could make a contract with all, as I can with some; if all could renew it among themselves, if each group of citizens, as a town, county, province, corporation, company, &c., formed by a like contract, and considered as a moral person, could thereafter, and always by a similar contract, agree with every and all other groups, it would be the same as if my own will were multiplied to infinity. I should be sure that the law thus made on all questions in the Republic, from millions of different initiatives, would never be anything but my law; and if this new order of things were called government, it would be my government.”—Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century, Sixth Study)

Sex is always consensual, anything else is rape. Legitimate government is consensual, anything else is State. Anarchism is basically the rejection of rape culture. Anarchism is based on the philosophy of consent. Statism and rape culture go hand-in-hand insofar as they reject the philosophy of consent. Anarchists simply take the axiom of The Declaration of Independence to its ultimate conclusion and hold that governments can only derive their just powers from the consent of the governed and that the people have the right to alter or to abolish government, and to institute new government.

“The Anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats.”—Benjamin Tucker (State Socialism and Anarchism)

If you want to abolish rape culture, you have to establish a culture of consent. But a culture of consent goes far beyond feminism. If you want to build a culture of consent, that means everyone must consent. Well, that's anarchism. Feminism, anti-racism, and advocacy of LGBTQ rights is entailed in that. To ban gay marriage is to govern the actions of homosexuals without their consent. To ban women from going topless in public is to govern women without their consent. To prohibit blacks from entering a restaurant or bar is to govern them without their consent. All of that is utterly incompatible with the philosophy of anarchism.