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.
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…
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.
That is not ignorance. That’ a chance to educate, and you blew it. Did you send them a link to the anarchist library or something and really expect them to read it. At that point you should have been asking what kind of question, aspects, interests them most, and give some pointers.
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”
That is not bad faith, but ignorance. Presumably because you failed to give a proper and vulgar definition yourself. Vulgar as in “doesn’t use misleading terms such as ‘state’ which has a completely different meaning in the dictionary than it does in anarchist theory so you should keep it out of first impressions and leave it to the history seminar”.
Frankly speaking, if you can’t advocate for anarchism without getting the term anarchy or any politics involved, you’re not doing it right. Not that that’s always the best approach, but it is a viable and valuable approach.
Or do you actually have something to deoppress in Europe that I can help with?
Why, are we so flawless on the continent that you’re itching for any opportunity, any, to apply your vast skills of deoppression? Go outside. You don’t need me to point out shit, shit should be obvious, question is how to grow flowers on it.
So, do you read book covers for the pretty fonts, or do read and conceptualize the contents of a news article with a journal to take notes with at the next post?
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!
Being asked for evidence that anarchism works and then just linking the US Revolution is an absolutely hilarious display of “Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?”.
So at what point was the US revolution proof of anarchism working? When the rich landholders rebelled against the king? Or when the rich landholders retainer power after the revolution?
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.
Oppression.
Why does US & Europe need oppressors?
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…
Is this a projective preach for yourself? Or do you actually have something to deoppress in Europe that I can help with?
If you read the thread from my responses, I was replied to in ignorance and bad faith.
That is not ignorance. That’ a chance to educate, and you blew it. Did you send them a link to the anarchist library or something and really expect them to read it. At that point you should have been asking what kind of question, aspects, interests them most, and give some pointers.
That is not bad faith, but ignorance. Presumably because you failed to give a proper and vulgar definition yourself. Vulgar as in “doesn’t use misleading terms such as ‘state’ which has a completely different meaning in the dictionary than it does in anarchist theory so you should keep it out of first impressions and leave it to the history seminar”.
Frankly speaking, if you can’t advocate for anarchism without getting the term anarchy or any politics involved, you’re not doing it right. Not that that’s always the best approach, but it is a viable and valuable approach.
Why, are we so flawless on the continent that you’re itching for any opportunity, any, to apply your vast skills of deoppression? Go outside. You don’t need me to point out shit, shit should be obvious, question is how to grow flowers on it.
So do you keep up to date with the new files being added every day?
So, do you read book covers for the pretty fonts, or do read and conceptualize the contents of a news article with a journal to take notes with at the next post?
I am not trying to be petty or mean, but I honestly don’t understand what you are trying to say.
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!
Being asked for evidence that anarchism works and then just linking the US Revolution is an absolutely hilarious display of “Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?”.
Keyword is “past.”
I’m aware literacy rates keep dropping. So I hope you get to reading!
So at what point was the US revolution proof of anarchism working? When the rich landholders rebelled against the king? Or when the rich landholders retainer power after the revolution?
Nah the problem is you’re blaming everyone else for some reason.
Blaming what‽