Anarchy Essay Example For Students

Anarchy Essay Anarchism seems to be defined many ways by many different sources. Mostdictionary definitions define anarchism as the absence of government. A leadingmodern dictionary, Websters Third International Dictionary, defines anarchismbriefly but accurately as, a political theory opposed to all forms ofgovernment and governmental restraint and advocating voluntary cooperation andfree association of individuals and groups in order to satisfy theirneeds. Other dictionaries describe anarchism with similar definitions. TheBritannica-Webster dictionary defines the word anarchism as, a politicaltheory that holds all government authority to be unnecessary and undesirable andadvocates a society based on voluntary cooperation of individuals andgroups. William Godwin was the first proclaimed anarchist in history andthe first to write about anarchism. Godwin published a book called PoliticalJustice in 1793 which first introduced his ideas about anarchism, Godwin wasforgotten about, however, and after h is death Pierre Joseph Proudhon became aleading anarchist figure in the world. His book What is Property? incorporatedgreater meaning to the word anarchism; anarchism became not only a rejection ofestablished authority but a theory opposing ownership of land and property aswell. Anarchism fully blossomed as a defined theory when Russian anarchistsMikhail Bakunin (1814-1876) and Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921) started to write andspeak. Bakunin had a major influence in the world and introduced anarchism tomany people. Kropotkin was one of the many people inspired by Bakunin. Kropotkinwrote many books on anarchism, including Muitual Aid, Fields Factories andWorkshops, and The Conquest of Bread, and greatly aided in the evolution of thetheory of anarchism. As the 20th century emerged anarchism began to peak and thedefinition of anarchism became concrete with the growth of new anarchist writersand movements. The execution and imprisonment of eight anarchists in Chicago in1886 sparked anarch isms growth in the United States. The HaymarketEight flourished anarchists such as Voltairine de Cleyre and Lucy Parsons. Today all but the most doctrinaire of scholars see a role for so-called soft law-precepts emanating from international bodies that conform in some sense to expectations of required behavior but that are not binding on states (the World Banks Guidelines on the Treatment of Foreign Direct Investment, for example). Soft law principles also represent a starting point for new hard law, which attaches a penalty to noncompliance. Whether in the case of hard or soft law, new participants are making increased demands for representation in international bodies, conferences, and other legal groupings and processes. They include both recognized and unrecognized substate entities (Hong Kong and Tibet, for example); nongovernmental organizations; and corporations. Scholars accept that these other actors have independent views that do not fit neatly into traditional theories of how law is made and enforced. Most states comply with much, even most, international law. But without a mechanism to bring transgressors into line, international law is law in name only. The traditional toolbox to secure compliance with the law of nations consist of negotiations, mediation, countermeasures, or, in rare cases, recourse to supranational judicial bodies such as the International Court of Justice. For many years, these tools have been supplemented by the work of international institutions, whose reports and resolutions often help mobilize shame against violators. But today, states, NGOs, and private entities have striven for sanctions. And the UNs ad hoc criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda show that it is at least possible to devise institutions to punish individuals for human rights atrocities. Nonetheless, the success of these enforcement mechanisms depends on the willingness of states to support them. When global institutions do not work, regional bodies may offer more influence over member conduct in economics, human rights, and other areas. In addition, domestic courts increasingly provide an additional venue to enforce international law. Even with a defined international law and a world government to enforce it, cooperation in general, in international politics, is troubled. Research on international regimes moved from attempts to describe the phenomena of interdependence and international regimes to closer analysis of the conditions under which countries cooperate. How does cooperation occur among sovereign states and how do international institutions affect it? Indeed, why should international institutions exist at all in a world dominated by sovereign states? This question seemed unanswerable if institutions were seen as opposed to or above, the state but not if the y were viewed as devices to help states accomplish their objectives. The new school of thought argued that, rather than imposing themselves on states, international institutions should respond to the demand by states for cooperative ways to fulfill their own purposes. By reducing uncertainty and the costs of