The twentieth century was the era of the development of various social theories, expressing the desire of thinking members of society to improve social relations. According to most philosophers, people of art, and sometimes even ordinary people, humanity has reached a civilizational dead end, the way out of which seemed simple to some, and almost impossible to others.
Most thinkers agreed that relations between members of society, based primarily on coercion and material interests, lead to the degeneration of the human race. The oppression of some sections of the population by others will take place as long as the state exists, and exploitation is inevitable in the conditions of commodity-money relations - the Social Democrats and Marxists were in solidarity with this.
At the turn of the century, the most paradoxical and radical ideas became popular, in particular those that called for the eradication of the root of all troubles - power as such, expressed in the state social structure.
The very word "anarchy" gives a general idea of who an anarchist is. The prefix "an" in Greek corresponds to the Russian "not" or "without", and "archie" means power. So, this is a person who denies the hierarchical structure of social control that has been formed over many centuries, representing a pyramid, regardless of the degree of totalitarianism, at the top of which is an autocratic monarch, a usurper tyrant or a democratically elected president.
To the question of who an anarchist is, most people who grew up in the Soviet era would confidently answer: “So this is Papandopulo!” Someone would also remember Nestor Makhno, whose image, formed by the art of socialist realism, was no less caricatured. The explanation for such a biased attitude towards the theory of anarchy and the free development of personality is simple.
A typical scene from a Soviet historical movie about the events of the civil war: an anarchist black flag with the slogan "Anarchy is the mother of order!" flying over a crowd of outcasts. A resolute Bolshevik commissar appears, who, ignoring the threats, after a short speech, wins an ideological victory. Who is an anarchist who listens to a communist and takes his side? Usually this is a downtrodden peasant who does not understand anything in politics, confused and seduced by beautiful promises. After the Bolshevik opened his eyes, he immediately goes over to the side of the Red Army.
For all the similarity of the goal formulated in the “Communist Manifesto” and expressed in the final destruction of the state, Marxists argued that it would come as a result ofsocialist revolution and subsequent construction. In other words, the apparatus of repression will wither away as soon as it is maximally strengthened. This is the main difference between Russian Marxists represented by Trotsky and Ulyanov (Lenin) and Bakuninists, Kropotkinists or Tolstoyans.
Like many social phenomena, anarchism was divided into several currents. Most of them have a negative attitude towards market relations, but some have a different opinion on this issue. In the question of who an individualist anarchist is and how he differs from an anarchist-syndicalist or anarchist-communist, the main criterion is the attitude towards private property.
At the present stage in many countries of the post-Soviet space, the role of the state often comes down to collecting taxes and protecting the interests of the so-called ruling elites. The absence or extreme scarcity of social guarantees, beggarly social security, the inability and unwillingness of the authorities to deal with these issues cause a part of the population to have great doubts about their need. Under such conditions, first in one independent country, then in another, an anarchist union is formed. Its founders are aware of the low political prospects of the movement they lead, but there is always a certain number of supporters of anarchy. As a rule, they regard anarchy as an unrealistic but beautiful dream.
