Friendship ended with America, EU is now my best friend
Friendship ended with America, EU is now my best friend
Friendship ended with America, EU is now my best friend
Let's be realistic now!
Anarchy just shifts the problem from “people with the most money bully the people with less” to “people with the most guns bully the people with less”.
What problems are there in: “Everyone should be armed! Money is theft!”?
Innumerable.
Then get to solving them!
European neoliberalism continues to create more problems, for profits!
Then get to solving them!
Generally one doesn't look to those in the ideological opposition for solutions.
Like European Neoliberalism…. How many more slaves from Africa & Guatemala do you need, @PugJesus@lemmy.world ?
So, I have a question: how did kings and governments get the monopoly on violence?
Anarchism doesn't really have a great answer to that question, and frankly I really dont think it needs one. It's reckons that people who understand the freedoms they have will fight to maintain them, and it understands those ideas within the context of now, rather than trying to thread a shakey narrative through all of history. If you want men from 100 years ago to answer all your questions today then Marxism is probably closer to what you want
Doubtless you can find Anarchist arguing about that question, its a good question. But at its core Anarchism is a more of a philosophy rather than an ideology. Its a collection of tools that one can employ to solve problems and win concessions from authority.
That said if you want to see some of said argument, The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow gives some nice answers. And does so whilst trying to build on the up to date evidence about what life was like that long ago.
Ah makes sense, thank you for that great answer (:
So in the root it relies on a belief that “good” people are in the majority and that our current structure gives an outsized amount of power to “bad” people?
Yes, but it's not like we spent the last 200 years hoping for that to happen on its own. In the very beginning the idea was "let's assassinate the king the rest will sort itself", nope, it doesn't, the king is in people's heads.
A word you'll hear used quite often nowadays in theoretical Anarchist circles is "prefiguration", building the new in the shell of the old, in particular building horizontal modes of organisation. When you see something being organised hierarchically, say, a workplace, and you have an idea on how to organise it horizontally (e.g. a cooperative), then do so. And be good at it.
The idea is that thus, hierarchical realism can be fought: That idea that people have in their head that to organise something, someone has to be in charge, call the shots, order people around, be able to exert authority over others, force others. The more people are part of those kinds of structures, the more obvious it will become that horizontal modes of organisation are also possible on larger levels, and people will work towards creating those. The avalanche needs to be built from the bottom up, as weird as that sounds.
In short: I can't tell you what's over the horizon, but I can give you a compass and say "Here, that direction, doesn't that look promising? Let's take a first step!".
...and meta side-note we're on lemmy. As everyone can just spin up their own instance (or happily join an instance with admins who admin instead of try to rule over their users) and the instances interact horizontally it's quite anarchic in principle. Evidently, it also works. That it was written by tankies is just extra irony on top, showing how little they understand their pet enemy.
Yea it basically requires that you are either a bad actor pretending this is true, or a basement dweller who choses to believe this is true. They have no idea the kind of assholes you meet traversing society, or they are the assholes. The 5 million people in Manhattan are just not going to live peacefully without law and order. Be fun to watch tho.
From inaction and popular belief that they can give people safety. People gave the "defense" job to kings and goverments with belief that they could focus on other stuff, not realizing they are giving up their freedom. Soon, kings and gov start to violate people all around.
To be fair, the ancient world was wildly unsafe and governments did provide a modicum of safety. Not just against aggressions, but also in terms of reliable access to food.
"Reliable access to food" as in "rowing bands of bandits won't burn your crops, in exchange, you have to pay tax to the king"
But yes it was a slow getting-use-to, at first it was at eye level "we grow food, you fight". That slow progression can be clearly seen by the various stuff that nobility couldn't do in the middle ages. You could not, for example, remove peasants from their land, it wasn't so much illegal as not thinkable -- until you could. Capitalism, especially in today's world, has no "noblesse oblige" any more that's why it's so much harsher in pretty much all aspects. Sure, liberal democracy claws some of that back but that's not capitalism.
And what’s stopping another group from using oppression to get the monopoly on power again once anarchy is introduced?
You.
You can cease your circular logic. Your response says you didn't read anarchists praxis, in history.
Well, would you mind telling what I should read to understand it better? The first link you send I did read, the second has thousands of files, so I didn’t know where to start.
All of it. Until you fully comprehend that when everyone's equipped with anti-oppression tools, nobody can, or should be oppressed.
@PugJesus@lemmy.world ’s meme is neoliberalism at its finest, sending bombs to Gaza, and slavering Africans. What “Freedom” is there, when they oppress other nations, and their civilians, through theft?
Rhetorics are praxis, yours are shit. Be less angry. Project less of your pain on random passers-by. Assume innocence. If you can't, work on it until you can. If you don't understand why that's the case, why it's a bad idea to preach from on-high as an Anarchist...
Jesus H. Christ.
Also a historical anarchist!
Happy Easter, anti-christ!
Well, can you point us to an example where anarchy effectively worked? With more than a thousand people?
It just doesn't seem to function, and you just don't want to try to figure out why and fix it.
That's the problem IMO with anarchists (like you).
Sure! Plenty of examples, both alive, and in the past.
It's just extremely saddening when statists forgo teaching basic anarchist praxis, and prefer to indoctrinate statist homogeneity.
Why does oppression function so well then, that freedom means now oppression of others, and you seem content on maintaining that contradiction? Since when was freedom justified in the oppression of others?
My problem is I don't like oppression, but you do!
Nah the problem is you're blaming everyone else for some reason.
Blaming what‽
Bro you already have anarchy, trump has turned the USA into a lawless place. This is it chief. Enjoy.
anarchism is the dissolution of the state and its monopoly on violence, not the dissolution of law. an anarchic society can have a law but no state, but a state and no law is a dictatorship
Ya, I know. I’ve just never been able to join you in the presumption that law can exist without a state. That’s where property rights come from. That’s where the mediums of exchange come from. At the end of the day someone’s in charge of making rules and enforcing them. At the family level up to a national level; and perhaps even a global level. I admire programs like USaid and see the value of governments. If there ever was a time to gain support for those ideas it would be now. I just want the government I had 4 months ago to come back.
And at this point I should chime in and note that the meaning of "state" in anarchist theory is not the dictionary one -- taking wikipedia:
A state is a political entity that regulates society and the population within a definite territory
Other societies have states, anarchist societies are states, by that definition. (Just for the record fascism is the unity of capital and state, not society and state).
Rather, the Anarchist definition formed under the influence of monarchical and bourgeois authoritarianism. Redoing the terminology and using "hierarchy" or something is way overdue IMNSHO: Continuing to use an unexpected definition of "state" causes lots of confusion, provides no clarity, thus hinders praxis, and as the theoretical and practical purpose of theory is to bolster praxis it has to go.
Also makes explaining why Ancaps aren't Anarchist way easier.
"In your stateless society, who will collect the garbage?" -- "The municipalities, just as they do now, I guess" -- "Didn't you just say you want to abolish the state?" -- "Yes the municipality will not be a state any more" -- "You're stupid and should feel stupid I'm voting for the fascists at least the garbage gets collected on time".
In a society with equally distributed power of violence you wouldn't have laws, but mere loose agreements. It is the monopoly on violence that gives one the authority to impose laws.
given the way real world "monopolies" on violence work, i would contend that true law has never existed
Laws which are used to oppress the poor, and not the colonists extracting wealth from other nations.
Your statist propaganda machine worked so well, that you have people confusing anti oppression tools with oppression tools. Hurrah for European Neoliberalism, Hurrah!
Sir, I'm not a fascist. I don't support death camps.
Maybe you're looking for another emperor in another castle?
No lol, just knew lots of Anarchists and communists growing up. Oh and the 'Fight a Tyranical Government' Libertarians. What are you guys up to these days? You seen the other two around?
The usual: Networking, feeding people, arming people, building solidarity, etc..
Did I mention I'm not American? Or did my name fly past you?
Sorry for assuming you were a weeb that was very rude. I also did not know they were Japanese anarchist so that is an exciting revelation. Carry-on brother. That must be a true oddity in your culture.