Anarchism (David Graeber)

Contrary to common presumptions (even my own) about anarchists advocating for an "anarchism" which destroys social, political and moral order, anarchism is explained here by Graeber as a more fluid self-reorganizing system of functioning. Cells in our bodies develop anarchically to a certain extent: they have a function to perform and do so without interference from a central authoritarian figure unless certain kinds of exceptions get thrown. Of course, it depends on some notion of "purpose awareness" of the units of anarchy in question. Societies that do not share common principles and future outlook are difficult, as they are, to get along in even centralized dictatorial setups -- much harder obviously with an anarchy instated. Anarchy indeed may be a higher, much more developed form of democracy, although democracy does depend on the goodwill, rationality of its subjects.

A very interesting notion Graeber brings up here is that of self-subverting authority: an authority structure that gradually defies the purpose of its own existence. Rose, being a great interviewer, notes that the authority structure does indeed remain intact to other candidates willing to benefit from it, but is relinquished from the relationship the immediate beneficiary holds with the authoritarian. Like how teachers will teach students gradually to the fullest extent of their diction, producing future academicians in and of their own rights, who shall then defy the monopolistic authority of their teacher in all matters academic. This is the signature of a "non-capitalistic" authoritarian. However, the teacher does continue to be a figure of authority to all those who would still like to know more from him. This is then a signature of legitimate authority, something that was not short-lived and temporary.