The Classic Political Theories of Socialism, Capitalism, and Anarchism are Unrealizable

by Denis Rancourt / August 12th, 2015

Three brilliant political theories on how to optimally organize and maintain society’s economic and power structures were described by Karl Marx, Adam Smith, and anarchists such as Michael Bakunin and Peter Kropotkin, which are, respectively:

None of these models can result in a stable large-scale society because spontaneous creation and growth of dominance hierarchies will always occur, and the resulting dominance hierarchies continuously consume or destroy all the groups, associations and institutions that might enable democratic frameworks and islands of liberty.

The classic models can never be permanently implanted. At best, these political theories serve solely to provide tentative guiding principles to organize and actuate the constant push-back against the dominance hierarchy’s always-increasing attacks that target individual freedoms, communities, and free associations.

The same political theories (including anarchism) also serve to construct the useful illusion — maintained by the institutions, the service intellectuals* and the propaganda — that a fair system is achievable, and that we are not simply played in a violent and oppressive hierarchy of dominance.

If we understand that there is no ultimate victory, that there will be constant assaults against the individual and community, and that political theories are merely potentially useful conceptual aids in combat against the voracious monster that is the occupying dominance hierarchy, then we can best choose how to utilize elements of the classic models in our active struggle for freedom and meaning.

But the most useful model of all is the realization that there is a constant systemic driving force towards a more authoritarian and more powerful societal hierarchy of dominance, and that its target is the individual (and authentic communities) precisely because the essential element of push-back against hierarchical encroachment is that very individual, which naturally seeks liberation and meaning.**

That is why, from the perspective of the rulers, the individual must be incapacitated [see video, below, and note**]. The main project of the occupying hierarchy of dominance is to constantly neuter and align individuals, and not allow authentic communities or competing internal hierarchies to arise. The education and wage-employment systems are the main components of this control, with the law-and-order instruments as the main “corrective” apparatus.

Freedom seekers would benefit from not limiting themselves to any particular textbook ideology, in favour of a realistic understanding of the nature of human societies, which always proliferate dominance hierarchies, to the limit of available technologies. The undeniable reality on the ground must inform our actions, rather than any particular theoretical idealization. Ideals and values, yes, but canned invented systems of wishful idealism, no.

*The meaning of the term “service intellectual” was introduced here: “Gradual Change is not Progress” by Denis G. Rancourt, Global Research, May 3, 2006,
**Rancourt, Denis G., Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism, Stairway Press, 2013. 

Denis G. Rancourt is a former tenured full professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada. He is a researcher for the Ontario Civil Liberties Association. He has published more than 100 articles in leading scientific journals, on physics and environmental science. He is the author of the book Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism. Denis can be reached at denis.rancourt@gmail.com. Read other articles by Denis.

This article was posted on Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 2:21pm and is filed under Anarchism, Capitalism, Socialism.