this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2024
23 points (92.6% liked)

Anarchism

1493 readers
37 users here now

Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.


Other anarchist comms

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

TL;DR: Is it possible to define hierarchy, as a useful term for communication and association between anarchists? If so, what are some of those definitions?

There are many different strains of anarchism, and specially since anarchists mostly believe in decentralization, I feel like many of our efforts go diluted for lack of collective organization. Sure, there are big anarchist collectives doing work out there, but I have the sensation that most youth or influential people who identify themselves with anarchist causes get lost in the plot simply for lack of a bigger movement. For most of the modes of anarchism there is one big bad evil guy, commonly named "hierarchy"; although writers and academics define those terms in their publications, I can't help but notice, at least in the forums I've been around, your average anarchists could be talking about two completely different concepts of hierarchy or oppression. Maybe if we had agreed upon definitions to those hot topics it would be easier to associate. Is that even possible? That we all agree on the same meaning for a word? Do we call Chomsky to solve this linguistical issue?

Or am I completely wrong in my questionings?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RoyBattyButCoward@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I was hoping you could give an example on how to link those two ideas without going on a rabbit hole on anarchist theory. If you don't have one that's fine.

[–] an_angerous_engineer@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Outside of spreading the definition that I've given, I don't know what else you'd need or want to do. I'd like to think that this comment thread doesn't really qualify as an 'anarchist theory rabbithole', so if the explanation I gave worked here then perhaps it can work elsewhere. I don't think that this definition is likely to be controversial.

Oh, sorry. I was confusing this thread with another one. So those last answers of mine were a misunderstanding.