- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 15,331
- Reaction score
- 5,569
Why do you think their fight was against hierarchies in general?
I think that a deeply-held belief in rationalism and liberty/equality will inevitably point you in that direction. Both then and now
Back then, thinking that all humans (white males at least) were equal, that caste didn't matter, and that the monarchy and priests weren't sent from god (or that god himself may not exist) was a pretty radical idea in an age of feudalism and coming off a few thousand years of slave societies. That's the liberty/equality part.
The rational part comes with rejecting mysticism and the supernatural and looking at human institutions. If the heavens aren't responsible for so much suffering and inequality, then what is? Oppressive institutions that create hierarchies.
So if you're a classical liberal, you had to be against hierarchy.
There's a pretty good argument that the natural inheritors of classical liberals of the 18th century are anarchists and non-authoritarian socialists, because they're the ones that reject hierarchy the most. Instead, we got the Ron Paul types that don't see a problem with private tyrannies (aka, corporations) exploiting workers, exploiting the environment, and amassing obscene amounts of wealth and power. These will obviously create immense inequality and the sharpest of hierarchies.