In an anarchist society, that is a community without hierarchies and rulers, threats are handled by the community. So one person with a big stick would have to fight everyone else to establish their dominance.
I don't see a good lemmy community to learn more about anarchy. Am i missing something? I know about sources online, but it would be nice to read what actual people have to discuss.
Anarchy means nobody is in charge. As soon as somebody with a big stick says they’re in charge it stops being anarchy.
Kind of incredible that they asked for a simple answer and you're the only one providing one in a sea of false information and extremely elaborate replies...
"Anarchy is an utopia where there's no one in a position of authority because no one feels the need/pulsion to be in power, what you're describing is outside these parameters so it isn't anarchy." would have been my version of what you said.
As an anarchist, I don’t think anarchy is a utopia, but the natural state of humanity.
It is, a lot of people just have pseudo mystical beliefs about how people will act when there is no state. They like to imagine everything bad about humans is capitalism/the state/insert Boogeyman, not that the state and laws exist because we tried the alternative and no system at all always does work out to might makes right. A warlord always moves in to fill the power vacuum.
Some people are bastards and any system you create has to be created with the explicit assumptions that people are bastards. Some people just want to believe no one is a bastard or that there are not enough bastards to hurt the reasonable people. I think those people are wildly optimistic, and removing power structures does not remove the temptation to exert power or the ability, only one specific means.
I agree in principle. Yet I think there is no one alternative but a lot and I dont think we have really tried them, especially not given the technological advances we are making. While not sold on anything yet, I'm definitely not a fan of the status quo.
I'm also not saying capitalism is inherently bad but the current state of it is so severely corrupt that nobody should defend it imo.
Agreed. Capital, states, etc all have issues in the same way. I just think the state can work for the people and I'm not convinced of the alternative. Both libertarians and anarchosyndicalists have some wild basically religious ideas about how everyone will basically just work together and not dick each other over because of... Social norms, I guess? I just have a hard time believing it.
There's a whole lot of different takes here already, so I'm just going to plug this very excellent book: Practical Anarchism: A Guide for Daily Life and bounce.
Answering the following question might help in clearing up misconceptions: what is anarchism to you ?
From there we can discuss whether or not your definition is correct, and address your question.
One thing to keep in mind is that any kind of government is at risk of being the the group with the bigger stick. A dictatorship only works because the group that supports the dictator keeps them in power. A democracy can still treat some of its citizens terribly, and the structure of the government makes is harder to oppose than "the guy with the bigger stick".
Saving this for later, as I want to hear responses as well.
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~