The anarchist movement, with its ideal of autarchy and absence of laws, never achieved lasting success because it clashed with human nature. This tension reflects a fundamental debate about whether human nature is immutable or can be transformed, a dilemma that has marked political and social history, from Plato and Aristotle to contemporary ideologies such as capitalism and communism. From my experience, I have learned that, beyond the political system, what truly matters are moral values and individual coherence to build a better society amidst our human imperfections.
A chimera of the anarchists is autarchy, the absence of laws. Self-management. The anarchist movement had a period of splendor that never managed to manifest success because it went against the nature of people.
Tal Ben-Shahar, in his wonderful book about happiness, talks to us about the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle.
For Plato, there are two worlds, the perfect world of forms and the imperfect world that we perceive. Aristotle separates from this position and considers that there is only one world, a single reality that is what we perceive through the senses.
How curious that this distinction has reached and influenced us to this day!
Tal Ben-Shahar cites in his work the work of Thomas Sowell from the Hoover Institute at Stanford University, in political science.
Sowell considers that all political conflicts can be reduced to a disagreement between two different views of human nature:
- The limited view that believes human nature is immutable, that it does not change
- The unlimited view that believes human nature can be changed and improved
Paraphrasing Ben-Shahar: “The capitalist system channels the interest of each individual towards the common good and makes no attempt to change self-interest or human nature”.
The opposite system of capitalism by default, communism, was inspired by an unlimited vision of humanity, trying to change it.
Many of the political discrepancies arise from these two visions that contrast our own nature.
There can be no reconciliation if our own ideas about human beings are so different.
Therefore, different political systems such as communism have not prospered in the long term, because they base their principles on an idealized vision of the human being.
I studied Anthropology at a University (“the house that overcomes shadows”) with a very marked left-wing vision. I had breakfast every day at the “Sierra Maestra”, a space in homage to the Cuban revolution.
Having an indigenist father, and growing up in an environment of social sciences and humanities, my summers were always very fun, that’s for sure.
It’s normal that, raised in a left-wing political space, with an immigrant grandfather from post-war Spain, with Republican ideas, veneration for Fidel and all that it meant for many Latin American countries, I had a vision influenced by that family environment.
I loved listening to the old works of Virulo with my grandfather: The history of Cuba, genesis, works from the late 70s and early 80s.
For those who don’t know him, Alejandro García Villalón, artistically known as Virulo, is a Cuban humorist, singer-songwriter, actor, and screenwriter born in Havana in 1955; he currently lives in Mexico.
He is recognized for his style that fuses music, satire, and social criticism, and for being one of the founding members of the Nueva Trova Cubana movement, along with figures such as Silvio Rodríguez, Pablo Milanés, and Noel Nicola.
At the University, the idea of anarchism and self-management generated an absolute fascination in me that blended with my musical interests in punk.
I used to buy the newspaper: “El Libertario”, attend punk concerts, and had a great friend from the heavy metal world, Jerry Chacón, a vocational and brilliant anthropologist with whom, over beers and glasses of rum, we could have endless conversations about all these topics of social consciousness, self-management, etc.
That romantic idea I came to have about politics and alternative models gradually faded as I developed my own criteria, based on my experience and what I lived in a country with a democracy, let’s call it “complex”, like Venezuela.
A beautiful country, but one that has been in a crisis of confidence for decades. The law is “relative”. Based on the part that interests them.
This crisis of values and trust made me stop believing in all political promises and my view of democracy became, at the very least, ironic and subversive.
Something didn’t quite add up for me.
I felt that the idea of “democracy” was sold to us well, and it allowed us to visualize the best political system we could have. Even when I saw a number of flaws, more evident in Latin American countries, possibly due to the youth of their democracies.
I became disillusioned with promises and parties and felt that people vote in each election, not out of hope or belief in a leader and their project, but for being the “least bad”. To prevent the bad right-wing or the more radical ones from coming to power.
That mediocrity kept increasing.
I got to know other realities, many countries in South America, Central America, and I knew the North American “empire”. And little by little, you mature and soften your stances. You realize that, in the light of youth, many ideas are nuanced by reality checks.
I’ve been in Spain for over 17 years, a wonderful country where I felt comfortable from day one. Here I have developed my personal and professional life and the borders blur.
As an immigrant you are an island, but I benefit from the immense fortune of having different backgrounds and experiences. Nothing is good or bad, today I understand that everything is a range of nuances.
I’ve been dedicated to the world of SEO and WordPress for 10 years, and I don’t see much difference from my research era. I’m still obsessed with people, how they think, what motivates them.
I’m still a student in many areas. I even started a second degree this year in psychology, a science that I love. I think I didn’t correctly calculate the time commitment it involves, but that’s another issue I’ll have to address later. 😉
Years ago, when I watched the series The Big Bang Theory, which I loved, an episode really struck me where Sheldon, with his authoritarian character, said:
— “I love China, they know how to control their people!”
I don’t want to trivialize, of course, the Chinese political system, but I have learned to realize that, from the West, we tend to simplify the world and apply our moral and political rules too easily.
Sheldon’s comment amused me because in a way it reflected my stance in the sense that I didn’t really believe in the innate goodness of people. I honestly think that human beings are social entities, and there are many people who prefer that “control” so they don’t have to think for themselves.
I understand it, it’s a comfortable position. But I was still surprised by my evolution. Did I go from being an idealist who believed in anarchy, to being a defender of democracy, to seeing that it had more holes than a colander and to defending more authoritarian systems?
Playing devil’s advocate, I often use Singapore as a wonderful example of educational and economic growth and a good balance between freedoms. I find it a very interesting case study.
Obviously this is not an apology. When I say Sheldon’s phrase, I say it seeking to generate controversy.
But I do have the feeling that any criticism we make of the democratic system immediately puts you in a very negative box. And I think that stance is mediocrity; following the rules without having any critical spirit.
If we don’t improve personally every day, and it’s a task we must do daily, shouldn’t we at least try to do it for society?
I’m not saying we need to hold political positions, but I am convinced that simply by improving our immediate surroundings, we can achieve great changes, even if we never see them, as our personal and collective efforts will unfold over time.
Like the cathedral builders whose work would never be completed. We live in an era of immediacy that is unreal.
Let’s slow down our lives and strive to improve ourselves, our children, and our society, but not by “resisting”. Human beings are imperfect and from the sidelines it’s “easy” to draw conclusions:
— “I would do it this way”
Accepting that we are imperfect, and that nothing we do will always work perfectly. At least we should advocate for that consistency.
Our ego dominates our discourse and perception of reality. Let’s not allow this to cloud our minds.
I am increasingly convinced that it’s not about the political system or the absence or presence of laws. It’s about moral values. Those principles that define who you are and what things you value as individuals.
As David Pastor Vico says in his book: “Ethics for the Distrustful”, “morality is a way of living”.
Humans invented a tool called morality to limit, simplify, and regulate our way of relating to other people.
In these accelerated times where attention has been hijacked, it is more necessary than ever to “stop” the whirlwind that surrounds us and makes our mind not focused on the here and now, and reflect:
What governs our morality? What are the values that motivate me? Where are these values leading me?
I hope you find a path to follow, I’m still searching. Live long and prosper!
