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
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.
mostly this is a joke about the phrase “true communism has never been tried”: “true law”, a state that fully enforces and abides by the law, has never been tried
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!
What? Laws are whatever those in power make them. Oppressive vs anti-oppressive is a matter of perspective. Oppressive is what oppresses my side, anti-oppressive is what oppresses the opposing side.
Sure, any society will eventually degrade into the owning class squeezing the working class dry, and society as a whole has short memory leading to cycles of bloody oppression and bloody revolution.
God fucking damn dude, I’m generally on your side, but you’re just one of the short-sighted morons playing right into the fash’s hands giving this stuff a bad name. Just shut up, mate.
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”.
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
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
What do you mean by “true law”?
mostly this is a joke about the phrase “true communism has never been tried”: “true law”, a state that fully enforces and abides by the law, has never been tried
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!
What? Laws are whatever those in power make them. Oppressive vs anti-oppressive is a matter of perspective. Oppressive is what oppresses my side, anti-oppressive is what oppresses the opposing side.
Sure, any society will eventually degrade into the owning class squeezing the working class dry, and society as a whole has short memory leading to cycles of bloody oppression and bloody revolution.
How are bolt cutters oppression?
Okay you lost me. I have no idea what you’re talking about.
You’re dialecting me about oppression. I’m Q.E.D. how bolt cutters can be used to dialect oppression.
Your last sentence seems to be a fascist quote of some sort, because Anarchists reject the notion of “society” and murder.
God fucking damn dude, I’m generally on your side, but you’re just one of the short-sighted morons playing right into the fash’s hands giving this stuff a bad name. Just shut up, mate.
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:
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”.
All very fair points. Thank you for adding some color and context.