this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2023
35 points (100.0% liked)

Lemmy.World Announcements

29026 readers
4 users here now

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages 🔥

https://status.lemmy.world

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to info@lemmy.world e-mail.

Report contact

Donations 💗

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Join the team

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

There is no rule against anarchism, why was I banned?

Also I don't support the unibombers methods, I am just an anarchist. This goes against the ideas of 196, where the only rule is that you have to post before you leave. @threegnomes@lemmy.blahaj.zone and other mods, I am very upset

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] faceless@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The rules are stupid, that's what I'm saying

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

yeah, but if you're an anarchist then I just don't get it. how can you hold someone to a rule or have any opinion on the quality of the rules when you've already decided that all rules are stupid and you're not following any of them (unless you maybe are just following some in order to stay out of jail because reality exists outside of our internal priorities)

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What a stupid fucking take.

Anarchism is a stateless society without hierarchy. It’s not a society without rules, people can mutually agree to live within a social framework.

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

until an anarchist comes along who thinks those rules are stupid.

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago
[–] mr_pip@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

that point doesn‘t really hold its worth. a murderer‘s house cannot be searched without a warrant just because he is a murderer, he still has a right to privacy, which police need to keep.

according to your take, police are allowed to search every self proclaimed anarchists houses.

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

what? no. That would require that the governing body of the police were itself anarchist... which is a paradox.

however, if the police did that then said anarchist would have to follow the establishment's rules in order to fight back and win. If said anarchist were always 100% true to their beliefs then they would not go the route of abiding the laws because they are against the establishment in every way. they would want to fight back, but not by following the rules.

in your scenario, you made the police out to be anarchists themselves which is a bit backward. the police are fascist, or any other totalitarianism or similar.