Walking on the Far Left

In its crude sense when used in colloquial dialect, anarchism is regarded as the operation of a society without the presence of a state or alternative political vanguard to enforce law and govern the people, often being synonymous with chaos and connoted with political violence. It is also clear to note that little is done to distinguish the similarly rooted yet subtly differing ideas of anarchism and anarchy, with the latter being more widely used in quotidian discussion, relating more to a state of disorder and limited organisation of society. However, what is often disregarded is that anarchism and anarchy can often exist in more implicit forms that do not necessarily feature use of force, direct action and political violence so as to achieve revolutionary aims and reconstitute existing models of society (Christoyannopoulos, 2024). It can instead take on a more pacifist appearance. As described in Henry David Thoreau's Theory of Civil Disobedience , an approach similar to what ...

"A school of thought in contemporary political philosophy that treats equality as the chief value of a just political system" This is how the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy defines an egalitarian system, essentially considering equality as the core priority for the successful functioning of a just society. While on first observations this principle doesn't seem vastly different to some of the core ideals advocated within Marxist and socialist doctrines (i.e. in relation to equality in distribution of wealth, land and opportunities, as well as the view meritocracy and meaningful work being the main reason for greater status being awarded to someone), this principle is often far from left wing in practise. This begs the questions: can an individual possessing great wealth (yet not showing any inclination to distribute it amongst others) still be considered as an egalitarian, and why do capitalists in particular like the egalitarian school of thought? Linking back to t...

So as to put into perspective the breadth on libertarianism and the stark contrast between its various interpretations and application to different concepts across the political spectrum, I have made this political compass based on my personal judgement. While libertarianism is generally considered centrist or centre, it is clear that upon looking at this depiction that many libertarian philosophies appear to be either concentrated around the far-left or far right. This is likely as a result of the clear link between  libertarianism and neoliberalism with social and economic anarchy , and the main aims of this ideology being in reducing the state's influence and ability to impose regulations on the markets and the values and behaviours of individuals.                                                      Generated using   The Political Comp...

The three political philosophies of libertarianism, liberalism and neoliberalism all have the common intentions of advocacy for individual liberty socially and economically in which freedom of expression and the strong opposition to an individual acting in any way within society that is against their own will and values (be that relating to the protection of their own needs, supporting and involving themselves with their community, the situations of political corruption, or to further allow them to gain influence within society, along with many other reasons). In spite of this, these philosophies do tend to clash, the main cause of this being due to the varying attitudes towards the state. This is shown with liberals considering it to be the states responsibility to support the people's interests, and for this to be assisted by democratic values within society, libertarianism to relate to the direction of society by the people with complete individual and collective liberty and lim...

The notion of communism being considered as a means of corruption of authoritarian power and acting as a theory of governance by which the supposed communitarian and anti-capitalist ethos supporting complete equality of opportunities and abolishing class, state and wealth overrides against this, as well as that communists are considered to be merely power hungry dictators, always surprises me especially considering that this completely opposes the original key principles of communism. According to Engels' 1847 work, The Principles of Communism, communism is defined as "the doctrine for the liberation of the conditions of the proletariat", this definition thus clearly proving to emphasise the communitarian aspects of communism and support collective liberty as well as promoting the individual rights and freedoms of the people, particularly the supposedly oppressed proletarians (those who live to support their needs through the selling of their labour to be benefited from (...