<a href="https://steemit.com/anarchism/@satire/anarchy-exposed-response-to-larkenrose-s-political-mythology-101-part-one"><h2>Part 2 - Debunking of larkenrose's argument</h2></a>

<h3>https://media.giphy.com/media/xT5LMvxsoOOSJ5dcxa/giphy.gif</h3>
<h3>Firstly, I will make no reference to morality.</h3>
<p><br /></p>
<p>It's an unnecessary irrelevance, which encourages <em>sophistry </em>and <em>word manipulation.</em> </p>
<p>There can be <em>no</em> debate while a party can make appeals to <em>arbitrary </em>moral systems.</p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>I will focus on discussions of <em>autonomy</em>,<em> human interests </em>and general <em>human organization</em>.</p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>I assume that humans are <em>individuals</em>, with <em>interests </em>that may or may not coincide.</p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>I will define human actions only by the <em>extent </em>of what is possible (since morality is out the window).</p>
<p><br /></p>
<h3>By Anarchism I refer to Individual Anarchism generally defined as &quot;opposition to state or social control over the individual &quot;. </h3>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism" rel="noopener">Source</a></p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>For clarification, since I attribute no moral value on actions and ideologies, I <em>cannot </em>depict Anarchic systems as 'bad'.</p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>By 'exposed' I generally mean stripping away the rhetoric, and <em>considering </em>the <em>implications </em>of <em>state-less </em>(centralized) <em>governance</em>.</p>
<p><br /></p>
<h3>A caricature of the sort of Anarchism I'm referring to is represented by this quote from Benjamin R Tucker: </h3>
<h3>&quot;if the individual has the right to govern himself, all external government is tyranny.&quot; </h3>
<p><a href="http://praxeology.net/BT-SSA.htm" rel="noopener">Source</a></p>
<p><br /></p>
<p><br /></p>