3 ms·

I've seen anarchy described as the removal of "unjust hierarchies", which feels like a cop-out that allows for hierarchies as long as they're "just"? But who de

• simiones 4y ago
  Well, "just hierarchies" in anarchist thought are extremely limited. For example, a just hierarchy is that between (non-abusive) parents and their small children. When a parent forbids their small child from eating another piece of candy, they are not an oppressive hierarchy imposing its will on the weak, even though to the child it may seem that way at the time, they are actually using the authority of their fully understanding of the world to help the child. Another example may be between teachers and pupils. When the teacher is speaking to the class, they have certain powers over the class (for example, to forbid them from speaking among themselves) that are just, as they come from the needs of the position, not from rigid power tripping. The point of anarchy is to look at all hierarchies through this lens, and renounce those that can't justify themselves in similar ways. It turns out, most hierarchies fall in the latter category - the world would be better without them - at least in anarchist thought. But some few do remain useful, and those are the ones that anarchists would keep. Note: I'm using "anarchist" in the philosophical and political sense, not in the more day to day sense that it has usually gotten. In fact, many "anarchists" in the common-sense terms are quite rigidly totalitarian in practice.