4 ms·

The first problem is that it's not obvious to me what the benefit of an anarchistic society would be. The best rule of figuring out fair playing rules in a soc

by fsloth 9y ago

The first problem is that it's not obvious to me what the benefit of an anarchistic society would be. The best rule of figuring out fair playing rules in a society is thinking you are someone else, and what would you like to happen in their shoes. Once you find something that seems more or less fair for all parties it's a good sign it's not obviously bad. Slavery almost immediately fails this test. For example, it's not obvious to me how anarchistic societies will deal with violence and crime. Mob justice? Public opinion is extremely sensitive to mass paranoia. If we apply the test of "stepping into the shoes of someone else" and imagined myself as the suspect of a crime, I would much rather take the process system of a modern state over mob rule to handle my case. Could you offer a counter example, from this fairness point of view, where an anarchistic society would outperform the state as implemented by western democracies?

psyc 9y ago
No software patents.
jessaustin 9y ago
Less neocolonialist mass murder in foreign lands for the purpose of enriching armaments manufacturers and their agents in government and media.
- fsloth 9y ago
  It sounds like you are positioning anarchy as a reactionary tool of retribution towards the elites, rather than as a better way to govern.
  - jessaustin 9y ago
    It sounds like you are positioning anarchy as a reactionary tool of retribution towards the elites, rather than as a better way to govern. So much packed into one sentence! If you think of anarchism as ever having been suggested as "a better way to govern", please go back to the beginning and try again. It is instead a better way to live. This thing you think we need, we don't actually need. And what "retribution"? Would it be "retribution" to tell "the elites" sorry you can't continue spending trillions of our public dollars bombing innocents for no discernible reason? Also, I would object to the form of your discourse. You asked for a counterexample, and multiple people have provided those. Please either argue against the counterexamples or concede the point.
    - fsloth 9y ago
      A counterexample: I live in Finland, we have no colonialist past or present and our foreign policy is based on not trying to piss anyone too much. We are a parlamentarian democracy, we are among the most egalitarian countries in the world and according to the metrics of a recent UN survey currently 'the happiest'. Like I wrote above, I don't really see 'not being anarchistic' as the root cause of whatever ills anarchism is claimed to cure. Look, if I could choose the psychological characteristics of my species I'd want to live in a communist utopia with actual egalitarianism. But it just does not work. It's been tried with a heavy human toll. Likewise for anarchism. If someone is pedddling a system for you that has no chance of working in the current world we are living in I would really question either the motives or the rationality of the proponent. This is turning rapidly quite political... I think our main difference is in how we believe a large ensemble of human beings is capable of behaving. We both would like that humankind could live as a huge trusting family. I don't see how that could be possible at the present moment.
      - jessaustin 9y ago
        I don't perceive anything we've said here as particularly political? (Other than the obvious: arguments for and against anarchism, which is a political concept but doesn't field any candidates.) But since you raise the issue... One wouldn't expect anyone from Finland, Switzerland, etc. to complain too much about the government. For the time being, these nations have "good" governments. Voters have some effect on national policies, police aren't slaughtering innocents with impunity at home, military isn't doing the same in numerous locations abroad. Please have some sympathy for the majority of humanity! You'll turn into us before we turn into you, if for no other reason than by a reversion to the mean. After all we export our delusions. Some people have seen enough American news to believe that it's an advantage to be on our "side" in an armed conflict. I have really enjoyed the TV series "Okkupert", and I do sympathize with any nation that borders a schizophrenic totalizing militarist kleptocracy, because the in the long term there will be violence. That's why I sympathize with Mexico.
- fsloth 9y ago
  As a person living in a country next to Russia, I actually find US military industrial complex as a comforting geopolitical counterbalance. I know lots of places have turned to shit thanks to US, so, I have no idea how to balance this fairly.
- PeterisP 9y ago
  How would an anarchy prevent a powerful and wealthy armaments manufacturer from funding and recruiting mercenaries to do neocolonialist mass murder in oil-rich foreign lands for fun and profit? As long as its profitable, I can only see there being less constraints in doing so than there is now.
  - jessaustin 9y ago
    They didn't become wealthy and powerful by spending money. They did so by constructing an elaborate fear-based belief system by which the apparatus of the State could be steered to pay them money, much more money than was ever admitted, directly out of the pockets of those subject to the State. Like a religion, except more violent and less consensual. Note that I'm talking about steering the State, not the electorate. If a truly democratic vote on the topic were held today, the military would be a tenth its current size tomorrow. They don't have to worry about democratic votes; they just need to leave Congress enough plausible deniability about what's really going on. They love this myth you perpetuate, of stealing foreign oil for fame and profit. As a nation, we have yet to see dollar one for all of our Middle Eastern atrocities dating back to the 1950s. All of this evil and violence has only ever profited the war pigs and their cronies. The rest of us have been stuck with the bill. This line of thinking reminds me of the drug prohibitionists. "If we stop killing drug dealers, they'll be even wealthier and they'll kill everyone!" No, silly, if drugs could be sold without fear of violence then drug sales would not require violence. Our fifty-year prohibition has created a cohort of thugs who would have to age out of the business, but if we stopped giving them vast sums of money then they could be dealt with like any other violent people.
kiliantics 9y ago
You seem to know a little about what you're talking about but you should really read further before making the kinds of claims you're making. There is lots of literature on how anarchist societies have dealt with crime and there is no question that they are fairer than modern western societies with their gross wealth inequalities, mass incarceration, racism, colonialism, etc. Right now, in Kurdish Syria (otherwise known as Rojava), there is a society built on principles that resemble anarchism pretty closely. They have very interesting decision-making processes, resource-management, and systems of justice. They also have pretty much no police as it isn't seen as necessary. There are lots of resources to learn about the details, here's one account I think is pretty good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4PVYxa28eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4PVYxa28eE
- fsloth 9y ago
  I'm living in a western democracy (Finland) with very little inequality, very lenient justice system and no colonialism. Out police is respected and admired. Recently we were gauged as the happiest country in the world (0). I just don't see how anarco-syndicalism would improve our lot. With this background, I would search solution to the worlds problems from somewhere else than pitting ananrchism against democratic hierarchy. I would suggest you look into the current situation on gender equality in kurdish nation before claiming it all together a 'better way'. (0) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/14/finland-happiest-country-world-un-report https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/14/finland-happie...
  - kiliantics 9y ago
    Finland may be pretty exceptional but your economy still benefits from western subjugation of people in poorer places. Where do all the parts and raw materials for your electronics companies come from? One of the major components of the kurdish revolution is gender equality and female liberation, that's why the YPJ units have been so popular in the media...

by fsloth 9y ago

psyc 9y ago

No software patents.

jessaustin 9y ago

Less neocolonialist mass murder in foreign lands for the purpose of enriching armaments manufacturers and their agents in government and media.

fsloth 9y ago
It sounds like you are positioning anarchy as a reactionary tool of retribution towards the elites, rather than as a better way to govern.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  It sounds like you are positioning anarchy as a reactionary tool of retribution towards the elites, rather than as a better way to govern. So much packed into one sentence! If you think of anarchism as ever having been suggested as "a better way to govern", please go back to the beginning and try again. It is instead a better way to live. This thing you think we need, we don't actually need. And what "retribution"? Would it be "retribution" to tell "the elites" sorry you can't continue spending trillions of our public dollars bombing innocents for no discernible reason? Also, I would object to the form of your discourse. You asked for a counterexample, and multiple people have provided those. Please either argue against the counterexamples or concede the point.
  - fsloth 9y ago
    A counterexample: I live in Finland, we have no colonialist past or present and our foreign policy is based on not trying to piss anyone too much. We are a parlamentarian democracy, we are among the most egalitarian countries in the world and according to the metrics of a recent UN survey currently 'the happiest'. Like I wrote above, I don't really see 'not being anarchistic' as the root cause of whatever ills anarchism is claimed to cure. Look, if I could choose the psychological characteristics of my species I'd want to live in a communist utopia with actual egalitarianism. But it just does not work. It's been tried with a heavy human toll. Likewise for anarchism. If someone is pedddling a system for you that has no chance of working in the current world we are living in I would really question either the motives or the rationality of the proponent. This is turning rapidly quite political... I think our main difference is in how we believe a large ensemble of human beings is capable of behaving. We both would like that humankind could live as a huge trusting family. I don't see how that could be possible at the present moment.
    - jessaustin 9y ago
      I don't perceive anything we've said here as particularly political? (Other than the obvious: arguments for and against anarchism, which is a political concept but doesn't field any candidates.) But since you raise the issue... One wouldn't expect anyone from Finland, Switzerland, etc. to complain too much about the government. For the time being, these nations have "good" governments. Voters have some effect on national policies, police aren't slaughtering innocents with impunity at home, military isn't doing the same in numerous locations abroad. Please have some sympathy for the majority of humanity! You'll turn into us before we turn into you, if for no other reason than by a reversion to the mean. After all we export our delusions. Some people have seen enough American news to believe that it's an advantage to be on our "side" in an armed conflict. I have really enjoyed the TV series "Okkupert", and I do sympathize with any nation that borders a schizophrenic totalizing militarist kleptocracy, because the in the long term there will be violence. That's why I sympathize with Mexico.
fsloth 9y ago
As a person living in a country next to Russia, I actually find US military industrial complex as a comforting geopolitical counterbalance. I know lots of places have turned to shit thanks to US, so, I have no idea how to balance this fairly.
PeterisP 9y ago
How would an anarchy prevent a powerful and wealthy armaments manufacturer from funding and recruiting mercenaries to do neocolonialist mass murder in oil-rich foreign lands for fun and profit? As long as its profitable, I can only see there being less constraints in doing so than there is now.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  They didn't become wealthy and powerful by spending money. They did so by constructing an elaborate fear-based belief system by which the apparatus of the State could be steered to pay them money, much more money than was ever admitted, directly out of the pockets of those subject to the State. Like a religion, except more violent and less consensual. Note that I'm talking about steering the State, not the electorate. If a truly democratic vote on the topic were held today, the military would be a tenth its current size tomorrow. They don't have to worry about democratic votes; they just need to leave Congress enough plausible deniability about what's really going on. They love this myth you perpetuate, of stealing foreign oil for fame and profit. As a nation, we have yet to see dollar one for all of our Middle Eastern atrocities dating back to the 1950s. All of this evil and violence has only ever profited the war pigs and their cronies. The rest of us have been stuck with the bill. This line of thinking reminds me of the drug prohibitionists. "If we stop killing drug dealers, they'll be even wealthier and they'll kill everyone!" No, silly, if drugs could be sold without fear of violence then drug sales would not require violence. Our fifty-year prohibition has created a cohort of thugs who would have to age out of the business, but if we stopped giving them vast sums of money then they could be dealt with like any other violent people.

kiliantics 9y ago

You seem to know a little about what you're talking about but you should really read further before making the kinds of claims you're making. There is lots of literature on how anarchist societies have dealt with crime and there is no question that they are fairer than modern western societies with their gross wealth inequalities, mass incarceration, racism, colonialism, etc. Right now, in Kurdish Syria (otherwise known as Rojava), there is a society built on principles that resemble anarchism pretty closely. They have very interesting decision-making processes, resource-management, and systems of justice. They also have pretty much no police as it isn't seen as necessary. There are lots of resources to learn about the details, here's one account I think is pretty good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4PVYxa28eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4PVYxa28eE

fsloth 9y ago
I'm living in a western democracy (Finland) with very little inequality, very lenient justice system and no colonialism. Out police is respected and admired. Recently we were gauged as the happiest country in the world (0). I just don't see how anarco-syndicalism would improve our lot. With this background, I would search solution to the worlds problems from somewhere else than pitting ananrchism against democratic hierarchy. I would suggest you look into the current situation on gender equality in kurdish nation before claiming it all together a 'better way'. (0) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/14/finland-happiest-country-world-un-report https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/14/finland-happie...
- kiliantics 9y ago
  Finland may be pretty exceptional but your economy still benefits from western subjugation of people in poorer places. Where do all the parts and raw materials for your electronics companies come from? One of the major components of the kurdish revolution is gender equality and female liberation, that's why the YPJ units have been so popular in the media...