6 ms·

I am no expert but my understanding is that anarchy is against rulers, not rules. And, insisting on carefully keeping in check the power of those who are given

I am no expert but my understanding is that anarchy is against rulers, not rules. And, insisting on carefully keeping in check the power of those who are given temporary power over others. Is the intention of your reply to promote the stereotype that anarchy equals lawlessness and chaos? From Wikipedia: Anarchist organizations come in a variety of forms, largely based upon common anarchist principles of voluntary cooperation, mutual aid, and direct action. They are also largely informed by anarchist social theory and philosophy, tending towards participation and decentralization.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
hayst4ck 3y ago
How do you enforce rules without hierarchy? How do you make efficient decisions and coordinate actions against an enemy who has decided that hierarchy allows them to wage war more efficiently and effectively. Anarchy hand waives away so many critical problems. It seems like a different flavor of libertarianism. I have a casual belief that anarchy is an ideology pushed by foreign interests (Russia in particular) namely to cause chaos and prevent institutional investment from otherwise liberal people. Institutions build power and power can be used for good or bad. Societies operations depends on good people getting into positions of power out of a sense of responsibility, rather than bad people getting into power out of a sense of ambition. Politics is largely an idea of how the game prisoners dilemma should be played. Libertarians and anarchists alike believe in an "always cooperate" strategy because "defection" is not a wildly different concept than domination. To defect against someone who cooperates is to dominate them. These ideologies take the stance that no one should be able to dominate, but fail to properly account for those who will choose to try to dominate anyway. These ideologies fail because no matter how much anyone wishes otherwise, might is the ultimate arbiter of disputes and participating in a hierarchy makes you, in the aggregate sense, stronger. This means it is a somewhat a fools errand to fight oppression because it assumes a position of less power. One must be able to oppress and then choose not to. Then you run into the greater problem of if there are no consequences for you because you are able to oppress, why should you be bound by an ideology that inhibits you? The biggest problem any anarchist faces is that they think they need to fight the police rather than become the police. An ideologically consistent anarchist should be on the police force exercising their individual power against those who try to dominate others and changing the culture of societies enforcers from within rather than thinking they can fight it from outside.
- snypher 3y ago
  >How do you enforce rules without hierarchy I find it interesting that people think rules can only be enforced by a position of power above the offender, rather than a consensus of their peers and equals.
  - hayst4ck 3y ago
    Walk me through it. Let's say a dead body was found with a gun shot wound. What happens? Tell me a detailed compelling story of a consensus of peers and equals investigating and resolving the murder.
    - FormerBandmate 3y ago
      Alabama used to love that method of justice. It was not a very good idea
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - crotho 3y ago
      [dead]
  - californiadreem 3y ago
    By this metric, stoning is anarchist in nature.
  - DoItToMe81 3y ago
    Historical anarchists enforced their rules through a state apparatus that organized mob lynchings and targeted killings. The CNT-FAI and Ukrainian Free State both had secret police organizations, and the former was no stranger to political terror.
    - dontlaugh 3y ago
      Indeed, all successful (even temporarily) anarchist groups grow a state apparatus. Which is inherently fine, states are a tool of class warfare. The capitalist ruling class uses state power for its own ends, a successful worker ruling class needs to do the same. I just wish the anarchists were honest about it.
FormerBandmate 3y ago
The centralized moderator that enforced the rules got arrested by the FBI, so they have the entire server

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

hayst4ck 3y ago

How do you enforce rules without hierarchy? How do you make efficient decisions and coordinate actions against an enemy who has decided that hierarchy allows them to wage war more efficiently and effectively. Anarchy hand waives away so many critical problems. It seems like a different flavor of libertarianism. I have a casual belief that anarchy is an ideology pushed by foreign interests (Russia in particular) namely to cause chaos and prevent institutional investment from otherwise liberal people. Institutions build power and power can be used for good or bad. Societies operations depends on good people getting into positions of power out of a sense of responsibility, rather than bad people getting into power out of a sense of ambition. Politics is largely an idea of how the game prisoners dilemma should be played. Libertarians and anarchists alike believe in an "always cooperate" strategy because "defection" is not a wildly different concept than domination. To defect against someone who cooperates is to dominate them. These ideologies take the stance that no one should be able to dominate, but fail to properly account for those who will choose to try to dominate anyway. These ideologies fail because no matter how much anyone wishes otherwise, might is the ultimate arbiter of disputes and participating in a hierarchy makes you, in the aggregate sense, stronger. This means it is a somewhat a fools errand to fight oppression because it assumes a position of less power. One must be able to oppress and then choose not to. Then you run into the greater problem of if there are no consequences for you because you are able to oppress, why should you be bound by an ideology that inhibits you? The biggest problem any anarchist faces is that they think they need to fight the police rather than become the police. An ideologically consistent anarchist should be on the police force exercising their individual power against those who try to dominate others and changing the culture of societies enforcers from within rather than thinking they can fight it from outside.

snypher 3y ago
>How do you enforce rules without hierarchy I find it interesting that people think rules can only be enforced by a position of power above the offender, rather than a consensus of their peers and equals.
- hayst4ck 3y ago
  Walk me through it. Let's say a dead body was found with a gun shot wound. What happens? Tell me a detailed compelling story of a consensus of peers and equals investigating and resolving the murder.
  - FormerBandmate 3y ago
    Alabama used to love that method of justice. It was not a very good idea
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - crotho 3y ago
    [dead]
- californiadreem 3y ago
  By this metric, stoning is anarchist in nature.
- DoItToMe81 3y ago
  Historical anarchists enforced their rules through a state apparatus that organized mob lynchings and targeted killings. The CNT-FAI and Ukrainian Free State both had secret police organizations, and the former was no stranger to political terror.
  - dontlaugh 3y ago
    Indeed, all successful (even temporarily) anarchist groups grow a state apparatus. Which is inherently fine, states are a tool of class warfare. The capitalist ruling class uses state power for its own ends, a successful worker ruling class needs to do the same. I just wish the anarchists were honest about it.

FormerBandmate 3y ago

The centralized moderator that enforced the rules got arrested by the FBI, so they have the entire server