Rule by no one in a state means rule by all, which declares unanimity in the provision of any rule. In other words, in political science, anarchy entails the absence of any authority that may be superior to states. An authority special to any state is capable of fostering and enforcing international law. Anarchy, therefore, makes states independent and sovereign (Condit, 2019). Lacking a centralized government makes it difficult to organize institutions. When conditions have no rules, their independence makes them disintegrate into smaller units, thus causing chaos. Harmony in such a society is dependent not on law or rather obedience but free agreements between different groups or units. It means no exploitation of the community like in a capitalist state. Depleting the process of decision-making of individuals in the state questions the conditions for the exercise of politics.
Nonetheless, anarchism is a trigger of socialism and has relatively more minor or negligible influence on politics; today, as Condit asserts (2019). Anarchists regard the state and the government as synchronous. It confuses force and constraint, linking the state and government and enemies of freedom while ignoring the fact that stateless societies have governments. Authority is ensuring decisions are obeyed. Furthermore, in answering the question of how would the government deal with lawbreakers is what creates anarchism. The power struggle is just but one of the dangers that anarchy poses. In contrast, war is inevitable in such systems. Anarchism was eminent during the Second World War. However, capitalism paved the way for neoliberalism that was opposed and led to a global movement by the end of the 20th century (Nedal & Nexon, 2021). In as much as there are variations in the acceptance of government systems, it is a sign of crisis. The document, therefore, looks into the importance of reducing anarchy by evaluating the negative impacts of lawlessness (Chiodo, 2020). Governments have employed different techniques to minimize anarchy, which is instrumental in the paper and primarily through global organizations.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Reducing Anarchy
It is absurd to think of anarchy as superior to governments. Havercroft and Prichard (2017) advocated that societies need governments for cooperation. The most convenient way to achieve security under anarchism is to possess power. Anarchy and maximization of control become a norm, according to realists. War and threats, therefore, become the only way of resolving conflicts. However, the routine of every state in the anarchical systems in defending its interests in violence becomes the only factor for developing cultures.
Meanwhile, a shift in the distribution of power could result in acute war. When the existing privileges, goods, and influence in systems become mismatched, the result is war. The development of an anarchical system is violence (what political scientists call hegemonic war) (Borzel & Risse, 2021). For instance, the First World War. On the contrary, every society creates a moral duty to obey the law for three specific reasons (Mattlin, 2021) . First and foremost, law holds back individuals against their neighbors. The second is that rules restrict liberty, and lastly, fosters coordination. Meanwhile, anarchists have no proof of consent or consensus for the legitimacy of law. What anarchists do not consider is that law is not necessarily for punishing and prohibiting. Law also empowers, not all anarchist systems formed are for good purposes.
In many instances, economic growth can stabilize only for a short period until a shift of power occurs. This is the reason why systems need to foster unity and centralize authority. One such solution is through globalization (Nedal & Nexon, 2021). Global institutions are evidenced to advocate for nonviolent solutions to problems and achieve prosperity and conflict minimization. Being a member of international organizations, for instance, the United Nations (UN) has been evidenced to foster peace and stability of societies, according to Börzel and Risse (2021).
On the contrary, an anarchical system has a proper way of resolving disputes or brings order to international politics. Every human being is an enemy to the other. A government is a collection of men in concert. If a government can imprison people, then non-government can also do so. In the absence of a government, social order or disorder may arise. Russia and Spain are the proponents of anarchism; however, the government becomes centralized (Mason, 2018, p.2-3) . Political parties were believed as usurpers that do not acknowledge equality. Therefore the parties were alienated from the people. Anarchism thus outcasts democracy. In this modern era, democracy is the way of living in which people can be heard a need to curb n anarchy.
Effects of Anarchy
Cooperation is essential global, especially when the benefits are to restore peace, order, and stability. International relations point out anarchy as one of the hindrances to the benefits of international cooperation. Conversely, two theories, modern realism and liberal institutionalism, have been applied in many instances on the contracts of anarchy in international collaboration (Mattlin, 2021). States play a significant role in world affairs influenced by anarchical politics. Neoliberalism mis-specifies an anarchical effect on the character and objectives of the states. On the other hand, realism gives a more compelling analysis of state collaboration. Therefore, modern realism is the most influential theory in international cooperation (Mattlin, 2021). U nder contemporary realism, people's chances of owning properties are limited. Since power is not centralized, it results in the most superior group in the region ruling. No rights are prevalent, and anybody can possess any property. Therefore, those with the most power and economic wealth will have more. Consequently, those with financial prosperity are likely to dominate the state.
Furthermore, people's interests would be scrupled and social integrity not observed. It can be linked to the two of Hitler's rule over the people in Germany. Conversely, one other negative impact of anarchy is the depreciation of the local currency (Correa, Cristi, & Oosterwijk, 2019). Life would become expensive as not tax collection would be prevalent, and therefore the country cannot develop. In an anarchical state, people would act opportunistically and venture into their interests. For instance, crime may rise since no one would fear the consequences, and people may be afraid to leave their homes. Since public infrastructure depends on taxes, management of social amenities would be poor identical to education levels. Meanwhile, even though the adverse effects of anarchy are many, anarchy enables people to govern them as they develop a higher level of freedom (Havercroft & Prichard, 2017) . Additionally, people would develop new social norms as the gap between the rich and the poor may less. Social cohesion strengthens no investors no jobs the states end being poor.
Effect of Global Organizations
Waltz's international system structure entails three elements: order, character, and distribution of capabilities (Borzel & Risse, 2021). Realists consider anarchy as an obeisance of superior authority. All people in the systems are functionally alike, implying that such systems will have no order. The distribution of power is imperfect since capabilities are never constant in a system. According to Condit (2019), states' survival becomes a principal motivation. Reducing any external threat from the outer world is essential means for survival purposes in anarchical systems. In contracts, a state may enjoy more influence than the other. Therefore to prevent dominance in the power distribution, a balance of power is necessary, which creates a threat in the system resulting in war.
However, realists argue that people are rational. Therefore people can engage in war, which does not mean it is brought by the anarchical systems (Mattlin, 2021). Today, balancing power can never be possible as there exists power dominance. However, the international organization has enabled states to settle disputes and centralized their authority. This is the reason why many parts of the world are safe today. International organizations have centralized laws and practices acceptable to states. For instance, the rules passed through treaties and rounds where states meet to engage in the democratic governance of fostering law and order in different regions. Through a global organization, human rights are promoted through a worldwide organization that leans to environment protection practices in countries (Fearon, 2018). The organization reduces anarchy in society by creating incentives for cooperation that make a coalition and easy interaction among states.
Conclusion
Anarchy is a system with no authority where everyone is the authority. Anarchism, therefore, is grounded towards liberty and equality. Anarchists claim that laws enable countries to repress people. States set rules and impose force on the people, which creates violence to overcome dominance. However, such consensus in this modern era is equivalent to democracy. Considering every individual's views and objections results in collective decisions with less objectionable. Furthermore, it implies that a system with no government faces many hindrances and violence. Every measure to come to a consensus starts with war, which is essential to counter anarchy. The document, therefore, elaborates on the importance of curbing anarchy. First and foremost, it elutes on different criteria of reducing by looking at the participation of states in a global organization. In conclusion, such an organization restores peace is even when there is still a disparity in wealth among states.
Furthermore, the effects of anarchy and its systems of government have been well detailed. By contrast, both the cons and pros of lawlessness, it is imperative not that anarchy brings any good deeds to the people as government systems in a state (Borzel & Risse, 2021). It creates a gap between the rich and the poor and results in wars violence hence a lack of peace to people living in the state. Tax collection becomes a problem, and therefore public institutions either close down or have poor services. In contrast, private institutions can only be afforded by the wealthy. The liberals believe that international diplomacy would be one of the greatest ways to do so as states will freely interact with each other. They will be supporting each other in different situations. It is important to reduce the anarchy and improve on democracy, and have politicians serve the public better instead of having small interest groups, which will improve people's quality of life and end the violence. Therefore it is essential to engage global organizations in fostering international law for peace's and prosperity, not forgetting economic prosperity.
References
Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2021). Effective Governance under Anarchy: Institutions, Legitimacy, and Social Trust in Areas of Limited Statehood . Cambridge University Press.
Chiodo, S. (2020). Technology and Anarchy: A Reading of Our Era . Lexington Books.
Condit, S. (2019). Anarchism in local governance . London: Anthem Press.
Correa, J., Cristi, A., & Oosterwijk, T. (2019, June). On the price of anarchy for flows over time. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (pp. 559-577).
Fearon, J. D. (2018). Cooperation, conflict, and the costs of anarchy. International Organization , 72(3), 523-59.
Havercroft, J., & Prichard, A. (2017). Anarchy and International Relations theory: reconsideration. Journal of International Political Theory , 13 (3), 252-265. Doi: 10.1177/1755088217719911
Mason, R. (2018). Spanish anarchists of Northern Australia . Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Mattlin, M. (2021). Anarchy is What Students Make of It: Wendt's Three Cultures of Anarchy. Journal of Political Science Education , 1-10. Doi: 10.1080/15512169.2020.1861457
Nedal, D. K., & Nexon, D. H. (2019). Anarchy and authority: international structure, the balance of power, and hierarchy. Journal of Global Security Studies , 4 (2), 169-189.
