Meeting Persephone

I admit that I know very little about the application of anarchy. My exposure to it is limited to the example of the Sex Pistols who made anarchy look childish and self-serving as well as damaging and outwardly harmful. It appeared to be a complete lack of concern or consideration for society at large. While anarchy might be implemented in a completely mature and personally as well as socially beneficial way, I've yet to see it myself. That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist and I'd like to be better informed of a representation of anarchy based on a more mature approach and how it would work in a community. Is that an oxymoron? To have anarchy work in a community?

Why do I care? Well, I'm trying to make sense of the anarchist movement within Druidry. That's what brought this all about. So many within Druidry state that they are anarchist and imply that Druidry is anarchist in nature. I'm not sure that I agree. That's why I'm trying to understand it.

I'm not sure that anarchy is conducive to Druidry. The ancient Druids themselves, from what we know of them, were lawkeepers as well as acting as judges. This signifies that laws were in place and that someone was interpreting those laws and their application within the tribes. It also implies, at least in my mind, that those within the tribe had no desire to live "lawlessly" but to have guidelines, at minimum, with which to live and to expect others to live with. Laws, I assume, that consisted of right behaviors, consequences, and compensations.

If anarchy is the absence of law and is self-governing, how does that mesh with Brehon? The two seem contrary. What is good for one is not necessarily good for the other and those things would have needed to be taken into consideration then just as they are today.

I'd love to have someone explain to me the place of anarchy within Druidry in a way that makes sense because I'm really not grasping this. I'm not seeking to become an anarchist. I'm sure that I'm not cut out for that though I do understand the rejection of certain laws and governments as well as government actions.

I've stated repeatedly that I consider myself to be a socialist. I believe in a honest democratic(sorry - this will sound like an oxymoron to many) government that does re-distribute wealth and represents as well as, to a certain extent, upholds universal laws (re: murder, rape, pedophilia etc.). I believe in the right to self-govern in so far as nobody else is forced to endure harm as a result of another's behavior. I'm an idealist, I know.

But getting back to anarchy which is really no less idealistic than my own point of view because it assumes that right behavior would occur naturally without law.

I can trust (most) Druids with a concept like anarchy because I'm well aware of the philosophical perspective of Druidry. But society as a whole without Druidry, Awen, Love, Peace, Wisdom and love of Justice? That's a much bigger step to take that I've seen no evidence that would support it being a good idea. Without Truth, how can a society function also without law? Is right behavior not to be expected of everyone?

Watching what is happening in society, there are many things missing and sadly deficient that I can't figure out. We have bred a culture of violence, poverty, hopelessness, greed, and selfishness.

Or does it not require people to maintain right behavior? It would be nice if someone came along and informed me on this one because I'm lost.

Or is this not a desire to see an anarchist society at all but just simply a way to view self? An expression of the desire not to be fenced in by dogma, government, or hierarchy? If this is the case, I still don't see the fertile planting ground for it within Druidry that some profess exists. To the best of my knowledge (which I confess is not complete), there is a form of hierarchy within most Pagan paths - from Arch Druid(ess) to Priest(ess) - there is some leader role represented. Or is this the desire for a personal theocracy within a small community of like-minded believers entitled to cut off from society and live with their own laws or lack thereof? In which case doesn't that just become a commune and who says you can't have that?

I'm just going to put this out there in the hopes that someone can explain it to me in a way that makes some sense and let me know if I've come close at all in any one of the several descriptions that I've questioned.