![\"\"](\"http:\/\/robertgraham.files.wordpress.com\/2010\/02\/errico-malatesta.gif?w=259&h=376\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
So, since it was thought that government was necessary and that without government there could only be disorder and confusion, it was natural and logical that anarchy, which means absence of government, should sound like absence of order.<\/p>\n
Nor is the phenomenon without parallel in the history of words. In times and in countries where the people believed in the need for government by one man (monarchy), the word republic, which is government by many, was in fact used in the sense of disorder and confusion\u2014and this meaning is still to be found in the popular language of almost all countries.<\/p>\n
Change opinion, convince the public that government is not only unnecessary, but extremely harmful, and then the word anarchy, just because it means absence of government, will come to mean for everybody: natural order, unity of human needs and the interests of all, complete freedom within complete solidarity.<\/p>\n
Those who say therefore that the anarchists have badly chosen their name because it is wrongly interpreted by the masses and lends itself to wrong interpretations, are mistaken. The error does not come from the word but from the thing; and the difficulties anarchists face in their propaganda do not depend on the name they have taken, but on the fact that their concept clashes with all the public\u2019s long established prejudices on the function of government, or the State as it is also called.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
~ Errico Malatesta, Anarchy<\/a><\/em> (1891)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
So, since it was thought that government was necessary and that without government there could only be disorder and confusion, it was natural and logical that anarchy, which means absence of government, should sound like absence of order. Nor is … Continue reading