Although the novel's plot is literally shaped by an attempt at anarchism, the plot only uses anarchism to explore another idea. Through the attempt at a new nation, the black people demonstrate the health of their desires for a better future. With too much anger and resentment, their attempts fail, and without access to education, the masses are left easily swayed by powerful rhetoric. Griggs is suggesting two strategies (neither are anarchy) for attaining a better future: avoiding hatred, and learning truth.
Griggs includes himself in the novel as a character as a person of authority in the government that he invents. He is like the good guy, and Belgrade is like the bad guy, so to speak. Griggs openly admits that it is confusing to be in authority, because he knows that there is a tendency to want to push one's own agenda and to be in control. He admits that power brings rewarding feelings of pride, and therefore he urges the community to resist the ego-driven politics of, well, Belgrade himself.
Belgrade's argument is what the people want to hear. Griggs is trying to focus on a strategic solution to problems, whereas Belgrade is exploiting the emotions of the masses to attain personal power. He exploits their anger and their sense of injustice, inciting them to violence, first against the state of Texas where he urges them to take their revenge, and then again when Piedmont steps forward to try and undo his influence. He urges the masses to execute Piedmont, a sign to Griggs that the government has failed.
A fascinating essay could be written by exploring this novel's plot in tandem with Plato's Republic so that this Imperium government could be seen as a metaphor for the health of Griggs's soul and sense of justice (the author, that is). In light of such a metaphor, what might Belgrade represent? And Piedmont? Clearly, such an essay should also mention the role of education in Griggs's own "republic."
