For a while, it seemed I had found just the perfect philosophy for me to support: anarchism. But you take a bit of this and a bit of that and it all comes back to square one. Of course anarchism is a naïve proposition; it is impossible for a society to exist without proper governance and a body to impose law and order. Despite that, I thought it could be rather an idealistic school of thought because a society where everyone was guided by a moral conscience (albeit a utopian vision) could exist in anarchy. But then I realized that this concept was flawed because everything is not black and white (and I’m not a child anymore). As a result of the fact that right and wrong are totally relative concepts (and my realization of this fact is a downfall for me because it suspends judgment in most cases and leaves me suspended between decisions, neither here nor there), anarchism cannot be sustained because any people will not be in absolute agreement over every single thing in life, even if they were following their individual conscience. Thus this is not just naïve and too idealistic, it is practically impossible.
I am disappointed, but…oh well.
P.S. I believe I have stumbled upon something extremely controversial. I’ve barely just started reading about it. Comments and arguments and opinions are most welcome. If anyone is reading, that is. P: