4 ms·

For some weird reason, people misunderstand the concept of anarchy, always using this word as a synonym for 'chaos'. In fact, anarchy is a theoretical and high

For some weird reason, people misunderstand the concept of anarchy, always using this word as a synonym for 'chaos'. In fact, anarchy is a theoretical and highly organized society that relies not on leadership and coercion to function, but on all members of society, who are educated and know their duties. For some weird reason, people believe it to be impossible, but we clearly see it happen in many circumstances, especially if you gather small-to-medium group of intelligent people together.

drummer 4y ago
Many years of brainwash from the slave masters have convinced the slaves that they need to be ruled because they cannot govern themselves individually.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
none_to_remain 4y ago
>who are educated and know their duties. I think every ideology would work if everyone was simply obedient to the duties imposed on them by those ideologues.
pixl97 4y ago
>especially if you gather small-to-medium group of intelligent people together. Hasn't everyone on HN read the Mythical Man-Month? Or, if you're a parent a corollary statement would be "The more boys you put in a group the faster the sum IQ reaches a negative number" Small groups tend to be self selecting and typically more compatible. Large populations are not. If you have one group that wants to piss in the river because it's close, and another group that does not want that because it is poisoning the water, there is going to be conflict. Now, this could be settled economically/infrastructurally by providing a sanitary sewer system, or by the down river group getting cholera and dying off, or the downriver group violently killing the upriver group off. But at the end of the day you'll have an loss of happiness cause by one group being dead, or both groups paying taxes so the system works. Anarchists tend to offer no solutions even for already solved problems, much less without introducing new ones.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  Well, this has never been tried, because existing power structures are actively resisting such society reorganization. You make your statements about society behaviour with such confidence, but you miss a certain factor: the society can't start to behave correctly out of a sudden. First, it must be educated. And from my life experience most people (like >90% of the total population!) already do work and coexist with others quite successfully without any coercion or governance, so ruling out anarchy as something 'impossible' is quite bold. What we need to try it is to get rid of some existing government (preferably, finding one where the constituents would want to convert to anarchy), and then figure out the common policy toward criminals.

drummer 4y ago

Many years of brainwash from the slave masters have convinced the slaves that they need to be ruled because they cannot govern themselves individually.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

none_to_remain 4y ago

>who are educated and know their duties. I think every ideology would work if everyone was simply obedient to the duties imposed on them by those ideologues.

pixl97 4y ago

>especially if you gather small-to-medium group of intelligent people together. Hasn't everyone on HN read the Mythical Man-Month? Or, if you're a parent a corollary statement would be "The more boys you put in a group the faster the sum IQ reaches a negative number" Small groups tend to be self selecting and typically more compatible. Large populations are not. If you have one group that wants to piss in the river because it's close, and another group that does not want that because it is poisoning the water, there is going to be conflict. Now, this could be settled economically/infrastructurally by providing a sanitary sewer system, or by the down river group getting cholera and dying off, or the downriver group violently killing the upriver group off. But at the end of the day you'll have an loss of happiness cause by one group being dead, or both groups paying taxes so the system works. Anarchists tend to offer no solutions even for already solved problems, much less without introducing new ones.

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
Well, this has never been tried, because existing power structures are actively resisting such society reorganization. You make your statements about society behaviour with such confidence, but you miss a certain factor: the society can't start to behave correctly out of a sudden. First, it must be educated. And from my life experience most people (like >90% of the total population!) already do work and coexist with others quite successfully without any coercion or governance, so ruling out anarchy as something 'impossible' is quite bold. What we need to try it is to get rid of some existing government (preferably, finding one where the constituents would want to convert to anarchy), and then figure out the common policy toward criminals.