5 ms·

Vs the classical conservative world view in which order, even if it's unjust, is usually better for everyone, even the people on the bottom, than chaos; and tha

Vs the classical conservative world view in which order, even if it's unjust, is usually better for everyone, even the people on the bottom, than chaos; and that dismantling power structures, if done suddenly or without care, is more likely to result in chaos than in a new, more just, order. I've been wondering lately if there is room for the notion of a conservative anarchist, who questions hierarchy but dismantles carefully and incrementally.

icebraining 9y ago
I've been wondering lately if there is room for the notion of a conservative anarchist, who questions hierarchy but dismantles carefully and incrementally. Sure! Those are the collaborationists, and are the first against the wall when the revolution comes. I'm only half-joking, see what happened to the Mensheviks in 1917-1921.
- fallingfrog 9y ago
  Sad but there's a lot of truth to that: if you are fighting against a nation state with an army, you have to have your own army to fight it. And on the day when you are victorious, you'll find yourself sitting on a large plot of land and people and the only intact organization around will be.. your army. And the government you form will closely resemble an army in form and function, and the high ranking members of the army will tend to become high ranking members of the new government. Hardly a blueprint for universal freedom. That's what tends to happen to violent revolutions.
  - avdempsey 9y ago
    The natural response would be instead of fighting a government with an army, experiment and build the structures that you would like to see, without dogma, learning as you go. When these structures solve enough problems for your community, a democratic country may peacefully transition.
    - fallingfrog 9y ago
      Yes!
danharaj 9y ago
Some strains of Daoist thought could be construed as a conservative anarchism, although such conservatism would be completely at odds with conservatism these days.
eeZah7Ux 9y ago
> Vs the classical conservative world view [...] Your phrasing implies that Chomsky supports acting "suddenly or without care", which is not the case at all.

icebraining 9y ago

I've been wondering lately if there is room for the notion of a conservative anarchist, who questions hierarchy but dismantles carefully and incrementally. Sure! Those are the collaborationists, and are the first against the wall when the revolution comes. I'm only half-joking, see what happened to the Mensheviks in 1917-1921.

fallingfrog 9y ago
Sad but there's a lot of truth to that: if you are fighting against a nation state with an army, you have to have your own army to fight it. And on the day when you are victorious, you'll find yourself sitting on a large plot of land and people and the only intact organization around will be.. your army. And the government you form will closely resemble an army in form and function, and the high ranking members of the army will tend to become high ranking members of the new government. Hardly a blueprint for universal freedom. That's what tends to happen to violent revolutions.
- avdempsey 9y ago
  The natural response would be instead of fighting a government with an army, experiment and build the structures that you would like to see, without dogma, learning as you go. When these structures solve enough problems for your community, a democratic country may peacefully transition.
  - fallingfrog 9y ago
    Yes!

danharaj 9y ago

Some strains of Daoist thought could be construed as a conservative anarchism, although such conservatism would be completely at odds with conservatism these days.

eeZah7Ux 9y ago

> Vs the classical conservative world view [...] Your phrasing implies that Chomsky supports acting "suddenly or without care", which is not the case at all.