Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

theaselliott t1_j0zbvkv wrote

Reply to comment by SirMichaelDonovan in Anarchism at the End of the World: A defence of the instinct that won’t go away by Sventipluk

Anarchists usually perceive anarchy as a process. Something that's unattainable but should always be strived for. Malatesta explains this well if I remember correctly.

72

Containedmultitudes t1_j0zpmuj wrote

I’m a big fan of Chomsky’s definition. My poor attempt to paraphrase: authority is not self justifying, and authoritarian structures that can not justify their existence should be dismantled. Could probably add what authority deserves to exist should be controlled through democratic processes.

41

Ikhlas37 t1_j0zhv2d wrote

Any share what the ultimate anarchic society (?) Would look like?

All i think of when i here anarchist is burning the establishment down and sticking it to the man which I'm assuming is only a small part of it? (Or a completely different thing under the same umbrella)

Edit: ah good old Reddit, where someone asks a genuine question to learn more and gets downvoted for not already knowing lol

Please don't mistake this edit as a plea for upvotes. Please continue to downvote or don't. Is that anarchy? The freedom of choice. ✊

5

Transocialist t1_j0zwunl wrote

Anarchism as a political philosophy strives for non-hierarchical cooperation. It's hard to say what an "end-stage" anarchist society would look like - anarchism focuses more on how people should go about organizing than the results of the organization.

I tend to imagine society organized across geographies by trade and industrial unions and in localities by consensus-driven democracy with local councils handling the day to day administrative tasks. The economy would primarily function almost as a gift economy, possibly with some markets for luxury goods.

28

iDrGonzo t1_j103ngb wrote

I think you can get a good idea of the philosophy behind post modern anarchism from Ursula K LeGuin's-The Dispossessed and The Left Hand of Darkness.

24

procrastinato_r t1_j119u00 wrote

Back in the 1970's I was thinking of doing a PhD with the title "The concept of justice in anarchist political theory" then I read The Dispossessed and realised anything I was going to write would not come close to what she achieved. So she saved 3 years of my life.

12

glum_plum t1_j11133a wrote

I want to add another great work of fiction portraying ararchic ways of life is A Country of Ghosts by Margaret Killjoy. Oh and Walkaway by Cory Doctorow.

6

SnapcasterWizard t1_j10cjvo wrote

Socialism isnt anarchism. In neither is anarchy as a system really explored.

−8

_CMDR_ t1_j10ywvb wrote

Anarcho socialism is a thing.

9

dfeeney95 t1_j111xdn wrote

So my idea of anarchy is making a choice for your personal situation based on your own morals regardless of the law. When I drive home from work today there are some stretches of the interstate that normally aren’t too busy, but the speed limit is 70mph I can safely and comfortably go 80mph so when I can I do go 80mph. My view of anarchism doesn’t mean looting and burning shit. Societies since the beginning of time have used natural law before a “state” existed do no harm to others and do no harm to the earth. MLK had a really good quote in his “letter from Birmingham jail” that to me is an anarchistic ideology “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”

6

glum_plum t1_j111aun wrote

It just seems like if you did read the posted piece, you should read it again. It might help clear up your questions.

2

Desmond_FanClub t1_j0zqe68 wrote

It would look like everyone singing kumbaya and sharing everything. There will be no prisons or strong state enforcement of law because, in anarchy-world, everyone will just be good and serial killers just need to have free food. All crime is due to poverty!

−31

RedditExecutiveAdmin t1_j0ziqjn wrote

Isn't the lack of any modern anarchistic society an indicator it doesn't work?

Even this blog article really can't wrangle with the fact that you need some form of law to deal with criminal behavior

edit: I stand corrected that there does appear to be some "anarchist" societies, but many have exceptions here or there. It still appears that anarchism is more of a beginning than an end. The evolution of law is too key of an aspect of human society to let it be essentially decentralized.

−30

rottentomatopi t1_j0zobfl wrote

No. Because to achieve an anarchistic society would require overcoming the power structures that have been in place for a really really long time. Doesn’t mean it’s impossible, just not probable in our lifetime, and maybe not in our children’s lifetime either. But what matters isn’t immediate effect, what matters is contributing to that future when it is possible.

Abolition, workers rights, women’s rights are all examples of movements that began with anarchist thought. They all involved questioning of a structural problem in society and the subsequent attempt to dismantle it. It takes time.

31

RedditExecutiveAdmin t1_j0zqfnt wrote

fair enough, i can respect that any anarchist society would need to overcome the existing power structures.

i do slightly disagree with the idea that abolition or civil rights "began with anarchist thought", but perhaps my definition of anarchism is different than this context. If questioning authority makes you an anarchist then sure, but then how can a stateless society enforce civil rights without state institutions?

0

Desmond_FanClub t1_j0zq1gv wrote

Do we consider “the fundamental social-psychological nature of the human mind” to be one of these “power structures?”

Because I agree, it will take a long time to overcome that. Like, we’d need to evolve into a different species before an anarchist social regime could ever hope to be stable and healthy

−8

Transocialist t1_j0zx85v wrote

What parts of the "social-psychological nature of the human mind" prevent which aspects of anarchist organizing?

17

Desmond_FanClub t1_j0zxbvm wrote

The part that makes me devious AF and wanna vandalize your shit

You gonna call the anarchy cops?

−18

Transocialist t1_j10074v wrote

I would defend my stuff myself or get my neighbors to help me or call the local defense council, sure. I mean, what stops you from doing that now? I see shit get vandalized every day and cops don't seem to do anything about it.

23

VitriolicViolet t1_j15jnnk wrote

whats to stop the local defence council from simply taking over and becoming a defacto government?

never seen any actual mechanism to prevent strongmen/warlords or the inevitable return of some form of hierarchical state, just some nebulous BS about how the 'people' would stop it.

1

Transocialist t1_j15pcv7 wrote

There's two parts to this:

  1. How do you prevent the people with arms in your community from banding together and taking over? Well, I'd imagine you'd spread defensive readiness across different sectors of your community, embedded within the populace. You would complement seasoned volunteers and appointed or elected leaders, probably with some measure of training for all adults. Ideally you would rotate your soldiers across communities too.

  2. How does a society prevent a different society from gathering enough strength to conquer them? I don't know, that's an open question. Once any society has figured this out we can talk.

1

Desmond_FanClub t1_j100fpt wrote

I’ll get an even BIGGER group of people to overwhelm the “local defense council” (whatever such a thing would actually, specifically look like in our modern context which anarchists never explain)

−4

BaldrClayton t1_j103gqe wrote

Well then I'll put a trap and hide it very well so you wouldn't be able to detect it and fall into it 100% if you ever try to steal my stuff. And it would not matter how many people you'd bring because I'd just put as many traps +1

15

Desmond_FanClub t1_j104jvj wrote

Jokes on you, the local trap council has been paid off (by me) and all your traps are disabled

0

BaldrClayton t1_j1055i2 wrote

AHA ! money doesn't exist in Anarchy so you lose ! (also my dad is in the trap council)

7

Transocialist t1_j104bez wrote

The local defense council would be a group of people elected or appointed by the community who are responsible for training, arming and organizing members in the community. How specific are you asking? Like what level of detail would convince you?

What stops you from doing that in hierarchical societies? I mean, powerful people in our society use their wealth and power to inflict terrible pain and misery on the poor. So, what's stopping them?

12

SnapcasterWizard t1_j10crf4 wrote

Lol so you would call the local government in a system without authority???

−8

Transocialist t1_j10jctb wrote

I would call the people who have volunteered to defend the community. Anarchist societies would still have institutions and organizations - but they should be organized as least-hierarchically as possible, built by the community democratically.

Anarchism is a set of ideals and organizational principles, not some utopian end goal.

10

silveroranges t1_j1000n4 wrote

damn, that would be a good band name. Anarchy Cops. In fact, I'm writing that down.

11

Desmond_FanClub t1_j10073m wrote

I’ll wait until you get big and then sue you for stealing the name

Wait, can I even do that in anarchy world?

1

Fuduzan t1_j10xbhy wrote

>sue you for stealing the name
>
>Wait, can I even do that in anarchy world?

Of course you can! What're they gonna to, sue you?

1

theaselliott t1_j0zk3qw wrote

Lack? Bro the world if full of anarchist experiments that have been going on for years. Just look it up.

12

Desmond_FanClub t1_j0zq6fi wrote

And every single one exists only with the blessing of non-anarchist societies.

−7

RedditExecutiveAdmin t1_j0zkgcj wrote

feel free to cite one but they obviously aren't working lol

−13

Containedmultitudes t1_j0zqhxu wrote

Hunter gatherer societies are in many ways anarchic and were the basis of human civilization for most of our existence. For a modern example the kibbutzim of Israel are a kind of anarchic society. There are tons of others as well. As a general matter, though, the fact that an ideology invites harsh repression doesn’t mean that ideology can’t work. Democracy didn’t exist for thousands of years and attempted democratic communities were brutally destroyed, but once democracy was able to overcome that history of oppression better societies were created.

14

RedditExecutiveAdmin t1_j103sf8 wrote

The Kibbutz is a very interesting read, but i'd agree it's only "kind of" anarchistic. As for the rest, I actually got to meet some EZLN members on a trip down to southern Mexico one time, got a shirt from them of Subcomandante Marcos

I think at the end of the day they're not purely anarchist though. And I'd argue hunter gatherers were not anarchist by choice. Hunter gatherers were not saying "ah, we could all form a democracy right now but things are working fine lets keep it this way"--it's just how it worked. Modern anarchists seek to reject state institutions. You cannot reject what is not there, and hunter gatherers were by that definition not really anarchist.

I also respectfully think some of these arguments miss the point that anarchy has had its chance. I really am trying to see how anarchy may exist in the future given some serious modifications in human behavior. But as you mention, democracy didn't exist for thousands of years and was even brutally suppressed. But anarchy has existed for thousands of years. Hasn't anarchy been "trying to work", or overcome the inception of other younger systems, for the entirety of life on earth? It seems misplaced to think there is a distant future where anarchy works when it's been the tried method for most of human history. How has anarchy not already had a chance to work? I'm open to a suggestion that it hasn't had a chance yet, but I personally can't come up with reasons to say it like that. It may be still trying but I think it's a stretch of reason to say anarchism hasn't already had a chance.

1