|
|
|
Revision:Unit 3 Edexcel Anarchism past questions and model answersTSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > Sociology > Unit 3 Edexcel Anarchism past questions and model answers
Past questions and mark schemesMark Scheme provided by Edexcel for the following questions:- June 2007Q1. Why have anarchists viewed the state as evil and oppressive? Anarchism is distinguished by a principled rejection of the state, in all its forms, as evil and oppressive. Anarchists emphasis that state authority is sovereign, compulsory, coercive and oppressive; the state is nothing less than legalised oppression operating in the interests of the powerful, propertied and privileged. The basis for this view of the state is the idea that political authority in any shape or form is absolutely corrupting. Although, in other respects, anarchists are highly optimistic about human nature, they warn that people become absolute tyrants when raised above others by power, privilege and wealth. This view amounts to a more extreme version of the liberal fear of power, in which those in power are bound to use it to benefit themselves at the expense of others. The difference is that this tendency is so pronounced that state power is untameable, constituting, as it does, a concentrated form of evil. In answering this question, consider the following issues:
No essay question on anarchism in June 2007 June 2008Q1 How do anarchist and Marxist views of the state differ? Anarchists view the state as a form of concentrated evil. Such a view is rooted in their theory of human nature and the belief that any form of political power is absolutely corrupting. Respectful and co-operative individuals thus become oppressive tyrants when invested with power or authority over others. The oppressive character of the state is heightened by the type of authority it exercises. Its authority is compulsory in the sense that citizens do not choose to become members of the state; it is coercive in that the state punishes those who challenge its authority; it is allencompassing in that (potentially) the state's authority knows no limits; it is exploitative in that the state extracts wealth from its citizens through taxation; and it is destructive in the sense that the state wages war for its own aggrandisement, calling on its citizens to either kill or die. The Marxist theory of the state is different in the sense that the state's oppressive character derives from the class system and not from human nature. For Marxists, the state is an instrument of class oppression, wielded by the economically dominant class and used to suppress subordinate classes. Although Marxists have sought to 'smash' the capitalist state, they have not rejected allstates as evil and oppressive. In particular, they have called for the establishment of a temporary socialist state, through the 'dictatorship of the proletariat'. The role of this proletarian dictatorship is to protect the gains of the revolution and smooth the transition to full communism through the suppression of the dispossessed bourgeoisie. Counter-revolution must therefore be countered. Moreover, as the state arises from the class system, the state will 'wither away' once class antagonisms abate and full communism is constructed. The state, therefore, does not need to be overthrown, and nor can it be destroyed while the class system continues to survive. Q5 Is anarchism close to individualism or collectivisism? Individualism is a belief in the supreme importance of the human individual over any collective group or entity. Collectivism, by contrast, is the belief that collective social action is morally and practically superior to individual self striving. Anarchism has been associated with both individualism and collectivism, creating rival individualist and collectivist anarchist traditions. Individualist anarchism takes the belief in individualism to its logical extreme. This extreme is reached through the idea of the sovereign individual, which portrays the individual as an entirely autonomous political and moral being. This implies anarchism, as law and government have no rightful authority over the individual and are therefore an affront to freedom. However, individualism is weaker in explaining how an anarchist society could remain peaceful and stable, as self-striving tends to imply conflict between and amongst individuals for limited resources. Individualist anarchists make additional assumptions, either about rationality or the capacity of social institutions, particularly market competition, to reconcile competing interests and maintain natural harmony. Anarcho-capitalists, for example, apply assumptions about market equilibrium to all areas of economic life. Collectivist anarchism similarly takes collectivism to its logical extreme. In this, human nature is seen to be naturally sociable, co-operative and gregarious, implying natural harmony amongst people. This demonstrates that the state is both evil and unnecessary. Mutualism, anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho communism are thus all essentially based upon collectivist assumptions about human nature. Some may therefore argue that anarchism is closer to collectivism than individualism. Others, however, may argue that each is basic to the anarchist tradition as the rival collectivist and individualist schools demonstrate.
Exemplar questionExplain the link between Anarchism and Collectivism Anarchism and Collectivists have several links, which will be explained in the essay. But what needs to be taken note of before listing the links is that there are two separate branches within Anarchism, which is individualism and collective Anarchism. Due to this reason only collectivist anarchists agree with collectivists, not individualistic anarchists. Unlike collectivists, individualistic anarchists prefer capitalism and belief humans by nature are self-striving. First of all, both anarchists and collectivists reject capitalism, due to their views about human nature, and because capitalism creates class exploitation and structural injustice, which replaces freedom and equality with oppression and social injustice. Anarchists and collectivists believe that humans by nature are co-operative, sociable beings that thrive in a collective environment. They both believe that humans are better suited to working together as it is morally and practically superior, than striving for individual self-interest, which goes against human nature. Due to these reasons there is no need to be regulated by capitalism, as they believe in interdependence of people in a collective environment, which is why capitalism is rejected. Second of all, both collectivists and anarchists believe that the state will ‘wither’ away without capitalism, as Marx argued. This is because without capitalism there would be no state, as the state produces or regulates capitalism. Due to these reasons collectivists and anarchists would prefer collective ownership of wealth and communal organization of social life, because of their view of natural order, and human nature. Natural order is the key belief of anarchists that humans have the capacity to order their own affairs, and don’t need the state to regulate them, as the state is unnaturally made. Both collectivists and anarchists believe that humans have the capacity to order their own affairs, in which humans also have the capacity for social solidarity, in which Kropotkin would describe as ‘mutual aid.’ Due to these reasons capitalism and the state is rejected as humans by nature, collectively can self-regulate themselves. Another link is in the anarchist’s belief in social solidarity as it is similar to collectivist behaviour, as it leads to cooperative behaviour, such as mutualism, which is a system of exchanging goods without profiteering or exploiting. Instead of capitalism, this system can be used, which would get rid of the need of a state to regulate the economy. Instead people themselves as a community self-regulate themselves, in which this would work because humans by nature are cooperative. Another link between anarchists and collectivists is between anarcho-communists and collectivists. They believe that wealth should be owned in common by the community, and not by an individual. Also both collective anarchists and collectivists believe that humans by nature have a sense of social duty, because they have feelings of sympathy towards other people. However unlike anarchists, some collectivists support the state, such as Marx and Lenin, whereas anarchists believe in a stateless state, as the state is seen as an unnecessary evil.
Past Anarchist questionsSome are old specification. June 2002
June 2003
June 2004
June 2005
June 2006
June 2007
June 2008
June 2009
|
|
|||||||||||||
