You must log in or register to comment.
Genuinely thought that said “anachronism” and was ready to go on a tirade about how cool cloaks are and how they should make a comeback
It rules!
Its interesting idea but i wonder if humans are capable of running it beyond so small groups that it wouldnt matter. It would require huge amount of planning and creative thinking to get anarchy working in such way it would benefit everyone and to mitigate its problems.
Then there is also the problem of our current system influencing the new system. Lets say we manage somehow overthrow the current opression and start implementing somekind of anarchy that has been planned in such way it functions beneficially for everyone. By its nature, there couldnt be any authority that defines what anarchy is by its core since it would be up to the people themselves.
I can imagine anarchy easily fragmenting into pieces and then some pieces gaining more support than others and then we would have several competing ideas. Ultimately one would win and others might or might not survive too. And then we would have new ruling system that is probably not anarchy. I dont mean this would happen immediately but eventually. So there would need to be somekind of defensive system against that that would prevent harmful ideas from gaining power, but how to make something like that without it becoming oppressive? And how do you restrict anarchy in the first place since the whole point is there is no central authority? And if you try to have authority that isnt central, you end up with multiple ones that become central authority within their area of influence.
Maybe i’m not as well versed on anarchy as i should to be throwing these thoughts around, but these are some thoughts i have on the subject. As far as i know, anarchism is that people make the rules themselves instead of there being central authority that tells them what to do.
So ultimately anarchism is idea that would require a lot of planning and researching to be even considered worth trying if you want to implement it in controlled way. And i dont see any government allowing such planning to happen since it would be direct threat to them if you manage to create something that is worth trying. And very likely if they still were to allow it, they would just want to influence your work in such way they gain more power from it at the expense of others. And if we had some government that would want it because they want what is good for everyone, then wouldnt that government type be what you wanted to have with anarchy in the first place? Anarchy for sake of itself doesnt seem very useful.
And if you want to implement it “naturally” by just removing all authorities and allowing people to settle things by themselves, i think we can all imagine how that would go.
When I think about it that way, anarchism seems more like “initialization” or starting point where you start building something more complex. Everything we currently have is founded on anarchism afterall, at least i dont think first humans could have had any other system. You cant really hold on to it because it will change either by the people or by the power that wants to preserve it.
Now this turned into kind of an essay
At its best it would be the most well functioning democracy possible, at its worst it would give way into centralisation (and infighting)
I don’t think anarchist states are impossible, but I do think it wouldn’t be as comfortable of a life compared to something more centralised.
- What led to the Haymarket Massacre, which might have been the main catalyst behind the 8-hour workday… So I cannot hate it out of principle
- Seems reasonable but I don’t know how to actually implement it
- For some reason is more associated with Anarcho-Capitalism rather than the other variants, which I thought was… Interesting
When I was younger, I believed that it was an ideal worth striving for. Now I don’t have that much faith in people anymore and I think that the best you can ask for is to try to live life your way and stay true to your beliefs and morals as best you can, according to whatever circumstances that you’ve been given.
A lot of people think it means total chaos, but it really just means an opposition to hierarchy.
People living comfortable lives will rationalize any critique of the system away, even if that comfort is built upon emiseration and exploitation.
Anarchy sounds good to me then someone asks “Who’d fix the sewers?”
edit: This is lyrics from The Dead Kennedy’s “Where Do You Draw the Line?”
Anarchist response would be “people who want functioning sewers, which should be everybody.”
Yeah it’s a dirty job. So is wiping your ass. Does someone need to threaten you to wipe your ass? Take a shower? When your toilet breaks at home do you shrug and just shit on the bathroom floor?
No, you fix the toilet. Same with the sewers.
Ok and who does that end up being?
Whoever steps up first. For a sewer, probably several people. What’s your point?
Most aren’t capable ir willing to do this work without substantial compensation above and beyond what most jobs provide.
honestly people like to talk about about moneyless societies but I’d imagine it would still be around for a while. I imagine a system where people chip into a fund to provide a bounty of sorts for jobs that require extreme skill or a strong stomach.
I think you may underestimate the impact of sewage backing up into your home :D
You are right though. Tragedy of the commons is a catch22. When everything is everyone’s problem, nothing is anyone’s problem. This occurs in EVERY political system though, and they still function.
Yes, capitalist republics compensate for this by paying others more for these jobs. Authoritarian states push people into these jobs. I’m not sure how this gets addressed in an anarchistic society in practical terms.
I’m of the opinion that an anarchist society is probably the wrong way, but incorporating anarchist ideals into things, such as “no really you actually are responsible for everyTHING (not everyone) around you” and “you are the only person who is capable of being responsible for your own choices, opinions and decisions.” and “consider the consequences of your actions before doing what you are told” and “a just hierarchy is one you are free to join and leave as required, and without coersion”, we can actually improve even our current system.
Someone doesn’t understand what anarchism is. Opinion discarded. Please read a book and return.
This is the opportunity to share resources and give them a direction to head, and you missed it.
Probably the people who own the sewers.
Let me rephrase the question, who will fix the potholes?
It’s a Dead Kennedy’s song and do people own the sewers in anarchist societies?
who will fix the potholes?
Make the libertarians do it! /s
Idk, ive fixed a pothole or two that bothered me near home, but yeah, I’m not doing a whole city lol
I think though that once people realize the onus is on them to fix things, people will start to fix things. Provided of course, that they have the means and ability to do so.
And then, there are still companies which can be hired to do these things, provided someone is willing to pay them
Thats something I find fascinating. People hear anarchy and assume the end of commerce because it would inherently mean an end to capitalism, presuming we arent talking about some weird ancap philosophy that I can’t make sense.
Commerce has happened for forever, and changing forms of government will not change that.
Thats not the part I find fascinating though, its that people discussing anarchy tend to cede this argument without a fight.
If you do so, an implied argument of anarchy gets lost: “there is no such thing as unskilled labor.”
This isnt generally considered a point for anarchy, but it is. In an anarchist system, you have the agency to decide your role in your community. This means you WILL specialize, as we all do as humans; even the generalists of us aren’t generalists at everything. I for one would make a shitty translator, as i only speak English.
There would need to be some means of getting labor done by someone who knew how to do it, this ought to feel natural to most of us anyway… I mean I assume you guys try to help your friends at stuff you are good at that they aren’t. I similarly assume you’re generally compensated for this behavior, even if it isnt with currency as we generally consider it.
People calling themselves anarchists seem to reliably be less of a red flag than when they call themselves communists.
I think there’s a lot of sentiment to sympathize with and a lot of ideas to learn about.
Implementation of anarchism seems hard and maybe sometimes a bit naïve, but on the other hand I don’t actually understand the specifics nor is there any one opinion.
Anarvhism refers to a vlass of ideologies moreso than any one in specific.
ITT: Nobody has any idea what any anarchist philosopher ever said or believed and simply thinks it means no rules
They then strut victoriously, thinking they are smarter than every anarchist philosopher who has ever existed because they know that rules matter in a society, not realizing that no anarchist thinker has ever said “let’s just have no rules or organization and just see how it goes based on the vibes”
I thought it was quite cool when I was a teenager. Then I grew up.
Aka you heard about it, did no reading on theory and slowly the capitalist culture you lived in burned your brain down. That’s what happens when you don’t have any actual education about something.
No, I’m quite aware of what it is … and concluded it to be a terrible idea.
Guys, he’s quite aware. All anarchist philosophy is dead! The great Concluder has spoken!
Of course not. There is still plenty of teenagers and homeless punks around.
Guys, he actually doesn’t know about anarchism. Bro nobody mention the zapatistas or WW2 Catalonia Spain to this guy. George Orwell, more like George nobody amiright? Bro actually thinks anarchism is when you’re homeless.
Yes, reapeating “you don’t now about anarchism” over and over again is a great argument. (I really mean it, you don’t got much else to work with).
Bro didn’t even read the last comment. Your man’s is coping, in shambles.
Bro thinks this is an argument lol, nah big dawg it’s a belittlement.
I think liberals don’t even know what it means, but insist their opinions on it need to be heard anyways, because all opinions are valid, right?
It seems foolish and young to me. Same as libertarian rules or rule by religious doctrine. None of that shit works. Just shiny little playthings to keep people distracted from real and genuine problems that cause an existential threat to all species living on earth.
Strange claim, given that it’s arguably how humans have organized their society for 296,000 years until that religion you dislike fucked it all up.
Uhm, no? For most of humanity, we were in patriarcal tribes. That’s not the same as anarchy. And the moment settlements grew, there was typically some kind of hierarchy in place, some chief.
Lol, love when someone just hangs their whole ass out on every point of order.
Quite literally impossible to implement. Same as true “Libertarianism”. Can’t actually exist.
Look at it this way. You and your neighbours want no government. No taxes. No laws. No “authority” telling you what to do and how to do it. Great!
What happens when the road needs to be fixed? Do you fix just the road in front of your house? Or do you negotiate with your neighbours for you all to pay a fair share to get the entire road done? Congratulations…you just invented government.
So now the road is getting done, but the people doing the work really don’t want to deal with every individual for every particular decision. It’s a much better idea to elect one person to do the communicating. Congratulations…you just invented civics and beaurocracy
This person that you all agreed to handle all of this stuff doesn’t have time anymore to support himself or his family because he’s dealing with your shit, so he demands that each of you pay an amount to keep in able to feed himself while he administrates your “anarchic society.” Congratulations…you just invented taxes
Replace “roads” with literally anything else in a community and the end result is the same. Both Libertarians and Anarchists are fucking morons.
Anarchism isn’t “no government”. I don’t think your larger assessment is incorrect in that anarchism is utopian in nature and unrealistic on a larger scale but your understanding of the ideology is flawed.
You don’t know what anarchism is or what it means and are arguing with a strawman.
anarchism means no rulers, not no rules
we would just use direct democracy for our government
we don’t even want no government, we want no state, those are different things
can you point to an anarchist philosopher who believes the nonsense you argued against?
You say they’re arguing against strawmen, but do nothing to refute the arguments or show why they’re strawmen. Let’s say you have what you want: Rules but no rulers, direct democracy, and government but no state (please explain the latter in more detail).
The local hospital needs to decide how much money (read: resources) to spend on constructing a new wing, and who should do the job. A power line has to be built to replace the one that just fell down, and your direct democracy decided last week that you want to do something to incentivise the farmers to produce healthier and more sustainable food, rather than easy to produce and unhealthy food, but you haven’t ironed out the details yet. The next option you have to affect these decisions is later today, when you’ll have some kind of meeting or vote to decide on the matters. How you will find a time and place that allows everyone to have their say is an obvious issue, but I’ll leave it to you to explain how to overcome it.
These decisions need to be made, and when everyone doesn’t agree, there needs to be a mechanism to get stuff done regardless. I haven’t even gotten started on how to deal with internal groups or outside forces that want to exploit the system or the society as a whole.
Please explain how this is solved without some kind of hierarchical system where some people make decisions and enforce those decisions on behalf of the group as a whole. These are the roles we typically assign to “rulers” or “the state” (i.e. the bureaucracy).
There are already people living this lifestyle, unfortunately one only has the choice if you have lots of money.
Lots of money? Do you actually know any anarchists? Living in communal squat houses and dumpster diving for food is the lifestyle that comes to mind for me.
So you don’t know any anarchists either, just the image you’ve seen in movies.
