5 ms·

The system a convention uses of having volunteers watching for bad behavior is actually already similar to anarchist concepts of community self defense. Under

The system a convention uses of having volunteers watching for bad behavior is actually already similar to anarchist concepts of community self defense. Under an anarchist society, the folks tasked with handling these sorts of things would be volunteers elected by the community (in a con they're instead volunteers screened by the con committee). There would also be an expectation that, in public spaces, it's everyone's job to step in and stop a problem like, say, sexual harassment (which some cons also expect). Having seen these principles in action at CHOP, I think it really does provide a better and more equitable outcome. However, anarchist systems do suffer from moving very slowly at times.

andi999 6y ago
I posted this already to a different question, but tell me: according to what you said, isnt the KKK a good example for this? It came from the community, was supported by the community, also they were very outspoken against (falsely accused) sexual harassment. Playing the devils advocate here, but I really would like to know why this is not an example of anarchy; of course answers like people will behave differently if there is no capitalism I find hard to accept without evidence.
- jtolmar 6y ago
  The KKK enforces law outside of its community. It's not like they're involving black people in the decision of who gets lynched. Anarchists are on the opposite end of the inclusion spectrum, even including the wrongdoer in the decision process for what the punishment is, when possible.
  - andi999 6y ago
    Thanks for the answer, but what does that mean practically? Anarchy is only for anarchists (which the correct mindset)? What about all the other people?
    - jtolmar 6y ago
      One of the fundamental ideas behind anarchy is that legitimate authority only comes from the community that authority affects. So, say you live in an anarchist commune, but do not believe in anarchy yourself. You're still invited to the meetings where policy is decided, and while you're not forced to, there's a lot of peer pressure to attend. You're still subject to the group's decisions. Say you completely disagree with this and want to go do something else. The commune tries to get you to attend a meeting about how to respect your wishes to be excluded, possibly sends a delegate if you refuse to participate in even that. They do their best to accommodate whatever it is you're trying to do, within reason (and anarchists are usually very accommodating). People who are extremely stubborn and to the point of being borderline hypothetical are a problem for the anarchist system, but in the end the solution is chosen by a bunch of humans thinking about the situation, and it's not like any other system has a better source of reasoning than humans.
      - andi999 6y ago
        And who makes sure that the authority comes only from the community this authority affects?
        jtolmar 6y ago
        Everyone else having similar structures. This is starting to sound less like good-faith questions than it did when it started. Are you trying to poke holes, or are you trying to understand how this is something someone could actually believe would work? Are you asking yourself how your questions are resolved in existing power structures?
        andi999 6y ago
        I never realised, but I think my trying to understand something works by trying to poke holes. I generally found the idea of self governance very appealing, and didnt think much about it, since I thought people have figured out some good ideas how to make it work. When I was getting older, I got more doubts. My biggest doubt/worry currently is that these kind of ideas can actually prepare the grounds for (local) genocide. I am trying to figure out if these worries are justified and this concept has to be rejected for the good of minorities, or if the concepts are advanced enough and take human nature into account. I do not know if this constitutes bad faith questioning.

andi999 6y ago

I posted this already to a different question, but tell me: according to what you said, isnt the KKK a good example for this? It came from the community, was supported by the community, also they were very outspoken against (falsely accused) sexual harassment. Playing the devils advocate here, but I really would like to know why this is not an example of anarchy; of course answers like people will behave differently if there is no capitalism I find hard to accept without evidence.

jtolmar 6y ago
The KKK enforces law outside of its community. It's not like they're involving black people in the decision of who gets lynched. Anarchists are on the opposite end of the inclusion spectrum, even including the wrongdoer in the decision process for what the punishment is, when possible.
- andi999 6y ago
  Thanks for the answer, but what does that mean practically? Anarchy is only for anarchists (which the correct mindset)? What about all the other people?
  - jtolmar 6y ago
    One of the fundamental ideas behind anarchy is that legitimate authority only comes from the community that authority affects. So, say you live in an anarchist commune, but do not believe in anarchy yourself. You're still invited to the meetings where policy is decided, and while you're not forced to, there's a lot of peer pressure to attend. You're still subject to the group's decisions. Say you completely disagree with this and want to go do something else. The commune tries to get you to attend a meeting about how to respect your wishes to be excluded, possibly sends a delegate if you refuse to participate in even that. They do their best to accommodate whatever it is you're trying to do, within reason (and anarchists are usually very accommodating). People who are extremely stubborn and to the point of being borderline hypothetical are a problem for the anarchist system, but in the end the solution is chosen by a bunch of humans thinking about the situation, and it's not like any other system has a better source of reasoning than humans.
    - andi999 6y ago
      And who makes sure that the authority comes only from the community this authority affects?
      - jtolmar 6y ago
        Everyone else having similar structures. This is starting to sound less like good-faith questions than it did when it started. Are you trying to poke holes, or are you trying to understand how this is something someone could actually believe would work? Are you asking yourself how your questions are resolved in existing power structures?
        andi999 6y ago
        I never realised, but I think my trying to understand something works by trying to poke holes. I generally found the idea of self governance very appealing, and didnt think much about it, since I thought people have figured out some good ideas how to make it work. When I was getting older, I got more doubts. My biggest doubt/worry currently is that these kind of ideas can actually prepare the grounds for (local) genocide. I am trying to figure out if these worries are justified and this concept has to be rejected for the good of minorities, or if the concepts are advanced enough and take human nature into account. I do not know if this constitutes bad faith questioning.