POLITICAL SCIENCE

ASSIGNMENT-1

PROBLEM OF ANARCHY AND TERRORISM IN MODERN STATE

Diksha Diwaker
L19BALB050

Submitted to Mr. Suvir Kapur

 INDEX

1. Abstract.............................................3

2. Introduction.......................................4.

3. Problems with Anarchy....................5,6

4. Problems with Terrorism ..................7,8,9

5. Conclusion.........................................10

6. Bibliography......................................11

2
Abstract

This paper is about the problem of Anarchy and Terrorism in Modern state. It is simple to
understand what kind of problem Anarchy and Terrorism are posing in the modern state. How
both Anarchy and Terrorism are bad for development of state. Anarchy is basically a state of
disorder due to absence of authority or other controlling systems. Which lead to a chaotic state
and Terrorism is the violence used in order to gain or reach some specific goals. Since both
harm the state in their own ways, they both are problem for the state. The psychology of
terrorism is marked more by theory and opinion. In order to attract and maintain the publicity
necessary to generate widespread fear, terrorists engage in increasingly dramatic, violent, and
high-profile attacks. These have included hijackings, hostage takings, kidnappings, car
bombings, and, frequently, suicide bombings. The German philosopher Immanuel Kant treated
anarchy in his Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View as consisting of "Law and
Freedom without Force". For Kant, anarchy falls short of being a true civil state because the
law is only an "empty recommendation" if force is not included to make this law efficacious
("legitimation", etymologically fancifully from legem timere, i.e. "fearing the law"). For there
to be such a state, force must be included while law and freedom are maintained, a state which
Kant calls a republic.

3
 Introduction

To understand the problem of Anarchy and Terrorism in Modern State we must understand
what Modern state is. Virtually every landmass of the globe is now the territory of some state.
The phenomenon is relatively recent, a feature of modern times, and it was initially European.
During the last five hundred years, Charles Tilly writes, three striking things have occurred.
And one of them is the development of the Modern State. Modern state, considered as the
fundamental from of political organization, has swept the world. It was not always so, and it
may not always be so. Other accounts stress social, institutional, or economic transformations
that made possible the impressive war-making capacities and other comparative advantages of
Modern states.

Anarchy, in political science and the study of international relations, the absence of any
authority superior to nation-states and capable of arbitrating their disputes and enforcing
international law. The term anarchy is derived from the ancient Greek root anrchos (“without
authority”), denoting the absence of the rule of law or of settled government. The prevalence
of anarchy in the relations between states is the basic assumption of realism, a prominent school
of thought in international relations theory.

Definitions of terrorism are usually complex and controversial, because of the inherent ferocity
and violence of terrorism, the term in its popular usage has developed an intense stigma. It was
first coined in the 1790s to refer to the terror used during the French Revolution by the
revolutionaries against their opponents. So the most commonly used definition to understand
terrorism is, the systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population
and thereby to bring about a particular political objectives, by nationalistic and religious
groups, by revolutionaries, and even by state institutions such as armies, intelligence services,
and police.

4
 Problems with Anarchy

What exactly anarchism is. Emma Goldman, the great American anarchist, defined it in 1910
as “the philosophy of a new social order based on liberty unrestricted by man-made law.”
Anarchists believe that all forms of government—be it a liberal democracy or a socialist state—
are based on violence and coercion. To sum it up: government equals tyranny. Many of you
might agree with that basic idea that state power is necessarily coercive yet wonder if there
really is an alternative. Perhaps we must suffer some degree of tyranny at the hands of
government in order to guarantee certain public goods, like education, health care, and
infrastructure.

We know what Anarchy means we should now know about the problems with Anarchy. There
are several problems with Anarchist system like Violence, Private Police/ Militias, Private
Property, Socio-Economic Issues, Branding.

Violence: to some of us violence is the biggest problem with the Anarchy. Since there is no
such higher authority to step in when things get out of hand. In an anarchist state, provided
they are properly equipped, people like this would thrive.

Private Militias and Policing: organizations would be formed based on need, and because
anarchism would be the prevailing governmental system, citizens would not be required to pay
taxes to support these organizations. This is great, but let's look at this hypothetical situation:
A woman in the community gets raped. Now, under anarchism, the possibilities for
investigation and reaction are endless. You don't dial 911 anymore. Inevitably, somebody in
the community will emerge as being the most capable of dealing with the perpetrator. This
person will likely (through no fault of their own) become a leader in the community, a protector.
What if the community has a problem with an invading militia from another community?
Again, leaders will emerge to deal with the problem. It is human nature. What is to prevent
these leaders from abusing their newfound power? Now they are armed and likely have a
command structure. This is how society started. We didn't have rules or laws or forms of
government, and then to combat problems the strongest, meanest and most capable were given
leadership. These private militias and police forces kept power and eventually led to larger
militias and police forces and governments formed to organize these institutions. Now this

5
obviously an over-simplification and generalization, but I simply don't see a viable solution
under an anarchist system.

Private Property: Under an anarchist system, how is private property held? Other than the threat
of violence, there is no system to protect private property. What is to prevent me from
organizing a bunch of big mean friends with guns, taking land, cattle, and food from those that
are less fortunate and organized and splitting the plunder? There is all the incentive in the
world, and an organized crime ring could take property and belongings as they pleased.

Socio-Economic Issues: There are socio-economic issues that, in my mind, anarchism would
exasperate. Under an anarchist system, those that are most capable or have the most resources
are able to operate in their daily lives most effectively. Those who do not have the same abilities
or societal standing will not see an improvement in their quality of life by removing a system
of governance.

Branding: Anarchism suffers from bad branding. I would even venture to say that the general
public would trust socialism over anarchy. I'm not saying it's justified, but the perception of
anarchy is overwhelmingly negative. The term anarchy conjures images of violence, chaos and
dystopia. In order for a system of government to be feasible, the general public will need to be
on board. With the current branding, that just isn't possible.

6
 Problems with Terrorism

It might seem like terrorism is a new phenomenon, but in reality it’s existed for 2000 years.
Terrorism is the use or threat of violence that aims to spread fear in a population, and to advance
a political, ideological or religious cause.

It’s important to understand that not all violent acts are terrorist acts. Terrorism is more of a
strategy than just a random act of violence, as it always includes some sort of political,
ideological or religious motivation on the part of the perpetrators. The reasons behind why a
group or individual would carry out a terrorist act vary.

Terrorism can be motivated by religious extremism, as seen in the rise of Islamist terrorism
since the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York in 2001. Religiously motivated
terrorism has also been carried out in the name of Christianity. The 2011 terrorist attack in
Norway and several attacks on clinics in the US were motivated by religious extremism and by
an opposition to women’s rights. Terrorism can also be motivated by political views, which
may overlap with religious reasons. For example, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombings were
carried out to send a message to the US government about FBI operations.

The problems with terrorism would be it effect the functioning of the state since it uses violence
in order to gain its goals by spreading fear in the population. The problems are Growth Effects,
Foreign Direct Investment, International Trade

How terrorism impacts The Growth Effects can be explained through a 2004 study by
economists Brock Blomberg, Gregory Hess and Athanasios Orphanides used a sample of 177
nations (developed and developing) over the period of 1968 to 2000 to estimate the effect of
terrorism on growth rates of gross domestic product (GDP). They found that transnational
terrorism has rather modest effects on the economy, reducing per capita GDP growth by 0.048
percent in a given year. A 2009 paper by Todd Sandler and his co-author Khusrav Gaibulloev
highlighted the differences between developed and developing nations by dividing a sample of
42 Asian nations into seven developed and 35 developing nations. They did not find any
significant adverse effect on growth for developed nations. However, an additional

7
transnational terrorist incident (per million people) reduced an affected developing nation’s
growth rate by around 1.4 percentage points

Greater terrorism in a developing nation raises the risk for foreign investors of not being able
to get the returns to their investments in the future. Such investors will look for safer alternate
nations to invest in.

Economists Alberto Abadie and Javier Gardeazabal investigated this issue in a paper published
in 2008 and found that there is substantial diversion of FDI from a venue nation of terrorism to
alternate terror-free nations. One standard deviation increase in the risk of terrorism in a
particular nation can reduce the country’s net FDI position by approximately 5 percent of its
GDP. This is a huge potential loss in capital formation for any nation, but it is especially hard
on a developing nation that seeks to use foreign investments to fuel its growth. A 2014 paper
by economists Subhayu Bandyopadhyay, Todd Sandler and Javed Younas focused on a sample
of 78 developing countries from 1984 to 2008. They found that a one standard deviation
increase in domestic terrorist incidents per 100,000 people reduces net FDI by between $323.6
million and $512.9 million for the average sample country, while the comparable reduction in
the case of transnational terrorist incidents is between $296.5 million and $735.7 million. They
also found that foreign aid can substantially mitigate terrorism related FDI damages due to
greater aid flows.

Terrorism raises the costs of doing business across national borders. For example, shipping
costs will rise if shippers have to buy insurance to cover possible damages in the ports of
terrorism-prone nations. In turn, such costs are passed on to the consumers in the form of higher
prices, which will tend to reduce both exports and imports of terror-affected nations.

Consider a pair of developed nations. Based on the table, which clearly shows that the most
terror-prone nations are developing nations, we would not expect terrorism to be a significant
deterrent to trade between this developed country pair. On the other extreme, consider a pair
of developing nations—and to make the case clear, consider a pair from the top 12 nations in
the table. For this pair, a good exported by one nation and imported by the other suffers
potential risks in transportation in both nations. This will contribute to higher trade costs and
prices and be a significant deterrent to trade. A 2004 paper by economists Volker Nitsch and

8
Dieter Schumacher found that a doubling in the number of terrorist incidents over the period
1960 to 1993 is associated with a decrease in bilateral trade among 200 countries by about 4
percent.

There is evolving literature on this issue, with some papers finding more modest effects of
terror on trade. Among other reasons, this may be due to changes in a nation’s production
patterns in response to terror-related disruptions. For example, if terror disproportionately
disrupts an import-competing domestic industry in a developing nation, that nation may be
forced to turn to imports for the good in question, thus raising rather than reducing trade.

9
 Conclusion

American anarchist, defined Anarchy in 1910 as “the philosophy of a new social order based
on liberty unrestricted by man-made law.” Anarchists believe that all forms of government—
be it a liberal democracy or a socialist state—are based on violence and coercion. basic idea
that state power is necessarily coercive yet wonder if there really is an alternative. Perhaps we
must suffer some degree of tyranny at the hands of government in order to guarantee certain
public goods, like education, health care, and infrastructure. There are several problems with
Anarchist system like Violence, Private Police/ Militias, Private Property, etc. It’s important to
understand that not all violent acts are terrorist acts. Terrorism is more of a strategy than just a
random act of violence, as it always includes some sort of political, ideological or religious
motivation on the part of the perpetrators. The reasons behind why a group or individual would
carry out a terrorist act vary. They both can become a greater threat for the state in the near
future if there are no corrective measures are taken. Terrorism is still a huge problem the world
is fighting against which. To conclude this Anarchy and Terrorism are creators of problem in
the modern state in many different ways and both of them have opinions and theories of their
origin.

10
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

www.stlouisfed.org

link.springer.com

henley-putnam.national.edu

www.nytimes.com

11