856
surely (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
173 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Can you point to any example of this happening in any major anarchist society?

The fact there are none is proof that's exactly what happens.

Yeah but why? Not because of any of the arguments you’re posing, but because anarchist societies have severeral disadvantages to start with, not because of anarchist philosophy, but because there’s people in power that desperately want anarchism to fail. Because if anarchism succeeded, their need for power would be in question. The bourgeois want anarchism to fail, the political elites want anarchism to fail, because if it doesn’t, they will have no reason to exist anymore, so, they will stop at nothing to destroy it. Anarchist societies are usually destroyed through militaristic means externally, not because of internal politics.

Exactly.

This doesn’t make your case against anarchism better, it makes it worse, if humans are given absolute power over a region, they’ll cause even more disasters than a democratic average of their wants and needs.

I think there's been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case. I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize. We are a species dictated by game theory.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The fact there are none is proof that’s exactly what happens.

    No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you're describing, proof the thing you're describing would be a primary source saying that happened.

    Exactly.

    That means none of the problems with anarchism are internal, which is a significant blow to the notion that we shouldn't be doing anarchism.

    I think there’s been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case.

    It doesn't, considering the only thing that stops anarchism is external forces destroying it, it's completely possible.

    I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize.

    This premise has nothing to do with anything, it doesn't matter how violent or greedy people are, anarchist philosophy has no bearing on these ideas.

    Anarchism is not disorganized, it's actually HIGHLY organized, because it's democratically managed.

    We are a species dictated by game theory.

    I don't see what that has to do with anything.

    So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? anarchism is fundamentally flawed.

    No, the world is setup in a way that destroys peoples movements in general, this isn't a flaw with anarchist ideology, this just means it's difficult to create an anarchist society while the US is a world superpower.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you’re describing, proof the thing you’re describing would be a primary source saying that happened.

    Thousands of years of human history is enough for me.

    So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see?

    As long as people are involved, there's the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn't as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller.

    I do appreciate how much hope you have.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Thousands of years of human history is enough for me.

    By this logic, if you were a feudalist, you'd say "capitalism could never work" simply because the conditions haven't been historically right.

    As long as people are involved, there’s the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn’t as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller.

    Right, so, anarchism has a reduced chance of internal strife and failure...

    I do appreciate how much hope you have.

    It has nothing to do with hope, and everything to do with reading and understanding theory and history.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    There are millions of Jimmys. Self-serving, power hungry people end up in positions of power because they are willing to do whatever it takes to get there. It's ok if you think I'm an ignorant asshole.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •