4 ms·
Nitpick, because it really rubs me the wrong way, to see this repeated again and again. What you are describing as anarchy here, is anomy in reality. Anarchy
by LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
Nitpick, because it really rubs me the wrong way, to see this repeated again and again.
What you are describing as anarchy here, is anomy in reality.
Anarchy is basically any society without rule from the top, whatever the top may be, replace by reasonable self-rule and consensual interactions of that society.
Anomy is chaos, ruled by the ones with the biggest bats, without any protections against that, for the masses.
That is a big difference.
- sympil 2y agoAnomy is chaos, ruled by the ones with the biggest bats, without any protections against that, for the masses. Then anarchy as you describe it can not exist. In a power vacuum someone will have the biggest bat and thus be the ruler.
- mr_toad 2y agoAnarchy argues that supreme executive power should not rest in a ceremonially selected individual but instead derive from a mandate from the masses. Yes that’s paraphrasing Monty Python. But real anarchism isn’t the rejection of all authority, just the rejection of hierarchies of power in favour of ideas of collective responsibility and decision making. Committees, not Crowns.
- sympil 2y ago…hierarchies of power in favour of ideas of collective responsibility and decision making. Thus it can’t exist becuase some group will eventually gain more power than others and thus exert control.
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y agoEven if only a purely speculative, theoretical concept, it's still a misnomer to use it as substitue for anomy.