![\"Anarchism\"](\"http:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/bscbusinessmanagement\/files\/2016\/06\/download_bf_3-300x225.jpg\")
\nI often feel that so much of my learning of theoretical and abstract concepts is retrospective and after true reflection. Considering myself of a more mathematical and practical mindset, I find this, while sometimes challenging, occasionally annoying due to there, often times, not being an agreed upon answer; it\u2019s philosophical, not physical. It\u2019s frustrating that the full connotations of these esoteric concepts cannot be learnt as a matter of practice but need to be conceptually understood and continuously built upon. Yet, I doubt any thinker would find abstract ideas particularly agreeable to contemplate. Anarchism is one of these ideas that I found myself unable to logically accept.
\nWhen I discovered one the MANG1020 sessions was on anarchism, I made no immediate connection from this inherently anti-cooperative way of living to the modern-day business world. In fact, I saw myself ask, \u201cWhy in the world are we learning about the antithesis of my degree? I\u2019ve come here to learn about business, not how I should destroy the foundations of our way of life!\u201d It was not until several months later, that my views on having that session would be so positive as to call it the highlight of my first year in business.
\nAnarchy. The word holds strong connotations associated with antiestablishmentarianism (had to get that in there, sorry), and, with my admittedly rather conservative ideological views, naturally didn\u2019t, in any way, appeal to me as a concept. To have the rules of society, law and order to be flouted in the favour of unbound, unaccountable whims of fancy in the name of being a \u2018free spirit\u2019 would surely bring ciaos, disadvantage and fear into the \u2018unsociety\u2019 of their world. Correct? Was I approaching anarchy with too much pessimism? Would it be the end of society as we know it? Would that be a bad thing? Who created the framework of our society and who were they to have that right?
\nChristine Donovan, a self-proclaimed anarchist and Irish traveller, sought to put anarchism in the context of cities during the two hour session. The accepted role of cities in society stems from it being a \u2018zone\u2019 that we take comfort in the knowledge that we can live and go to work safely. Christine made the argument that, while this is true, it prevents people from choosing to be \u2018under the radar\u2019 from CCTV footage or \u2018loiter\u2019 while actually just wanting to watch the world go by. We have to follow dedicated roads and pavements that direct our movement and force us to conform to city planners. She stated that Paris\u2019 wide boulevards exist to only enable security services to get to trouble spots quickly. In Southampton, WestQuay make all walk through all the shops before being allowed to access the lifts, forcing you to subject yourself to a bombardment of advertising. Mayflower Halls kitchens expose you to the outdoors- even if you didn\u2019t want to be.
\nIt are these examples, that anarchists argue, that encourage or force conformed behaviour, take away our curiosity and invade our privacy. I found myself asking, \u201cSo what\u2026.we shouldn\u2019t have CCTV? So we should be allowed to do anything we want to do, without respect for rules?\u201d with rather sarcastic overtones. \u201cHow could the layout of a road effect my freedom? Of course layouts serve a purpose\u201d. \u201cOf course Basildon District Council was correct to evict the travellers on Dale Farm! They hadn\u2019t obtained planning permission.\u201d \u201cWho cares if someone seems me making a cup of tea!\u201d
\nThere was a mention of parkouring to university, instead of taking a bus or car, and I lost it. The seemingly ridiculous suggestion that I shouldn\u2019t take a bus for the sake of unconformity cemented the unpracticalness of the idea in my mind. To me, the people that subscribed to this view of anarchism were proactively choosing and fighting not to engage in society and didn\u2019t appreciate the reason for its existence. We have rules and all are subject to them, and what in the world does me parkouring have anything to do with the business world. These were my views on the matter walking out of that session. It was everything I thought abhorrent, unpractical and disrespectful. It took me all this time to realise anarchism challenged the paradigms that society is built upon.
\nIt finally dawned upon me that it is the challenging of these assumptively set paradigms that enables change in the world. Anarchism is merely an (over exaggerated) idea that directly challenges the reason of why we conform, behave in certain ways and live our lives \u2013 which is most certainly the reason I become annoyed during the session. The way society constructs itself is something I certainly had put little thought into, and anarchism opens that debate. It is this revelation that has made Chistine\u2019s session my most memorable. Business plays a massive role in developing and forming society; it is, in many ways the catalyst for change and new ideas \u2013 whether known or not. This is where the motivations of anarchism and business link. It is the realisation that business had a moral duty to society to consider the broader implications of the effect it has on society. Take computers and the internet. They\u2019ve made the world smaller than it ever has been, for those that engage in them. Yet what about those who don\u2019t participate in the technology revolution? Will they feel more isolated from the world? Will they have the same influence and voice (I say this as I use the internet and a computer myself; could I have gotten this article to you if I chose not to participate?)? Will it decrease human contact? Should people be forced to \u2018be online\u2019?
\nThe computer and internet are undoubtable excellent forces of good in society and brilliant business ideas are surrounded upon them, but it\u2019s important to think about the implications of the questions above and the countless others that can be asked. It\u2019s what the responsible and aware businessperson would do. I\u2019ve never been an anarchist, and never will be, but the motivations behind anarchism are an important element in forming a personalised, welcoming and free society. Whether during the creation of a new business idea or when we are walking across the city, the limitations of our ventures should be recognised. The practical application of anarchism is about accepting there are constraints, but we shouldn\u2019t, necessarily, be bound by them. <\/p>\n