Anarchy in theory is great and it is fairly obvious for small societies but it’s complicated for me to imagine how a a functional anarchist society would work with more people.
It would need very proactive and trustworthy people. Anyways I want to know how you all think of solving these problems.
The penalty system. I mean like what now is judges, cops, lawyers. I am guessing there will still be laws? I mean who would decide those anyways and if there were no laws ig it would be case specific. I guess people could do that without needing cops and if you get enough people you cpuld also find a system for that instead of laws
Military forces. I mean like an anarchist country could already be a target. So like if you have no defenses you disappear eventually and if that happens what was the point of having an anarchist country. And then like who is keeping all the weapons and stuff. I mean it could technically just once again be a non-for-profit and people who wqnt to fight just fight.
And some person just trying to take the power while getting people join to them. Even if they don’t get control a lot of people could die.
Like Idk maybe I am missing something or I’m dumb, well I am but like fkdjmed I was saying like all of these would need proactive, trustworthy, dedicated and good people. But I don’t think that’s the mayority of people, maybe I may be wrong but idk. Besides from a lot of people being agaonst the whole idea in the first place making it vey hard or almpst impoasible to mantain.
I still wanna hear what you all think of this ans other possible problems that you know of to like clear things up a little more for me, ty!
Your imagination has failed. There are a million ways to do this shit, and part of anarchism is allowing many ways of life to thrive.
I’ll also be reminding you that we currently have literally every problem you’re proposing, often funded or exacerbated by tax dollars and capital’s infernal machinery. Literally the worst case you’re afraid of isn’t worse than how most people already live.
You’ve seen how industrialized centralized militaries do against scrappy insurgencies where every person is a potential fighter. Its not good for them. They lose. They limp home bleeding. The wounds kill the beast as often as not. When the means of production proliferate and are impossible to control, so do the means of resistance. Nothing short of scorched earth extermination would give them the advantage, and I’m not even sure of that.
Though the almost-anarchist AANES has several organized military groups that fought off the much larger better armed turkish-isis coalition, the anarchist-influenced zapatistas fought off the much larger Mexican federal military, and even Mao largely adopted our methods to make his authoritarian warlordism work for shit.
Nope. You know when shit isn’t okay? When nobody would appreciate some shit? Yeah you do. Don’t fucking do that shit, or somebody, anybody, might do something about it. Unless you explain yourself. No more violent than a group of dedicated killers and kidnappers roaming the street, probably less, and certainly more egalitarian.
It might even stop some of the awful shit victimization and exploitation that laws enforce and do nothing to stop.
My answer to ‘who will stop murders if not police?’ is always ‘worst case? Same as now; friends and bystanders. But bystanders will be empowered to act and my tax dollars won’t have paid for the bullet and a weeks paid vacation for the murderer’
People including myself have been raised and brutalized when we fail to participate in societies that run on engines of vice. Its been drilled into us. You still asked this. I was still here to answer you. A decentralized system of social cohesion is more adaptable and less corruptable, because there are no single points of failure and it doesn’t valorize exploitation and corruption.
Without the hyperobject of authoritarian violence escalating everything, it gets a lot easier to talk to people about shit.
When we aren’t all alienated from how others support us and our ways of life, it gets much easier to compromise with them, because the compromise is shit like ‘okay, let’s make more slightly less excessive graphics cards’ or ‘let’s all be a little hungry, so nobody fucking starves to death, because I throw up and waste like a thousand calories every time I see a corpse’ rather than ‘exterminate half the Jews and half the queers and half the (oh my god thanks was a centrist)’.
Takes a lot to maintain. The maintenance of injustice obeys almost the rules of thermodynamics. Without a belief than injustice is necessary or even acceptable, without a follower herd mentality where we can only make change with the permission of a daddy, it’s much harder to do and does not scale. Of course it will never be completely even-the best fish will always be at the coasts, just as it is now, and the farmer or expert gardener will always taste the best vegetables, but a conscious effort to keep everyone happy and fed is in everyone’s best interest, and who doesn’t want to share what they love? Which leads to
If I want to put together a gaming computer, that requires infrastructure. That requires miners and electrical engineers and mechanical engineers and all sorts of technicians and tons of resources. That’s not really a problem; I know for a fact there are people in all of those professions who want to call me slurs and remind me that my mom gets way more laid than me (like I never lived in the same house with the woman) while they tea bag my virtual corpse. And they want others to shout slurs at over the internet too!
It’s usually infrastructure that takes the real work. Infrastructure works for everybody, and if nobody owns it, everybody can use it, be responsible for it, maintain and improve it, make it work for them. Look at how open source software works.
And its a lot less tempting to exploit others when you’ll have to defend that shit yourself, and everyone will hate you for it. Maybe kill you or embargo you for it. So everything ends up being for everybody. Or close enough.
You’ve never seen this shit. Every time you’ve ever been told you’re allowed or disallowed, it wasn’t based on ecological carrying capacity or long term feasability, but on totally artificial structures of privilege.
It feels a lot different to be told ‘I’m sorry, there’s no food left. I can’t help’ or ‘this is incurable. All the research is hitting a brick wall’ than ‘sorry, you can’t afford to live, fucking peasant.’. Right now if I steal food, less food gets thrown away and the line doesn’t go up so much. During a famine in a rational society, if I steal food someone else goes hungry-or there was enough food I didn’t have to steal it. It’s not the same.
In the future; consider reading a fucking book.
That was unnecessary
Removed by mod
Yes… that’s why I am asking… I think I nentioned or implied that or I tried to. I am half sure I literally said I was dumb somewhere.
Some people would kill you for things others would praise you for, but yea moral compass stuff and that.
Also did you just also include communism? I didn’t really ask for that one and I don’t think I needed it but thanks for the effort.
Anyways yea you kinda make some good points and explained the stuff mostly even if you exagerated a bit in some places kinda but I get the point.
WHAT WAS THAT FOR‽ Like it was a geniuine question thanks for the help but if it is offensive or something you probs should not answer it anyways- But sorry I guess, I should’ve probably just searched it up.
They’re afraid they’ll have to come up with an actual plan. Attacking you is just an attempt to make them look better, it’s basically ‘couch revolutionism’. There’s likely no intention for you to even read any of it. It’s all for them.
Anarchy is a power void, there is no collective defense against private militias or half the country annexing itself and picking their own government, or just being wiped out by a neighbor that isn’t an anarchy. Who’s to stop them? Everyone? What if they don’t want to? It’s their right, after-all.
“You can’t organize your own militia outside of the anarchy!”
“You can’t just dip out on a war! We’re under attack!”
lmao, a stalinist
I addressed most of what you said in my comment. Others have written books on the topic. All of which, especially my upthread comment, are very available for you to read if you weren’t afraid of being told you are wrong.
Hey, there’s no need to be rude. This person came here in good faith and you’re being disrespectful for no good reason.
That’s not how you bring people over to our side.
Americans don’t respect weakness and we have more than enough illiterate morons in every ideology. I’d prefer curious people be educated, and encourage them to seek that out. You can coddle if you like; diversity of tactics and all.
We’ve met plenty of americans not like that. So maybe it’s good to not generalise and take things on a case by case basis instead of assuming all of them are like that?
Also, we wouldn’t call being kind and respectful ‘coddling’
I’ve probably met more. Lots of them seem like they’re not like that, but they are.
Second point is contextual I suppose.
The infrastructure is a good topic. I would like to see the roads repaired and holes filled. The barrier added to protect people from dangerous situations or to slow cars in front of the school or the children care.
Today it is not efficient and these things never get done. Maybe the state cannot “afford” or does not has “the capacity” or “the right” or it is “private”.
If you try to take these actions with the agreement of your community and do it with the collective people and tools then it does not matter. The state will come to your home and punish you and your community and the state will destroy your improvements. If you resist this oppresion then they will use violence against you and your community because that is what must be done.
The people know what the problems be, the people want to fix them and they know how to fix them. The state and the ministry and the offices and the officials and the laws and the small power that is held over others prevent you from fixing them with the threat of violence.
Also ypu loterally mentioned alternatives to some things I said, I asked for that so like I don’t know what the point there is because like idk why you would have answered the question if I asked to do everything the same.