this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2023
959 points (100.0% liked)

196

16503 readers
2158 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Most people talking about anarchy just want to f*** some s*** up because they feel powerless or threatened or boxed in. But that's not what anarchy is or how it functions as a community structure.

A good way to think about anarchism as an actual community structure, as a commune, is to think about the native Americans pre colonization.

Anarchism is not the absence of societal or authority structures, it's freedom to create your own rules within your community and exist separately from other communities.

So each native American tribe had their own rules and their own territory and within that territory their rules were absolute, but 20 mi over other tribe had their own rules and territory and their rules were absolute.

It's actually pretty similar to the idea of having separate states that get to make their own laws in the United States(guns and prostitutes are fine in one state but get you years of prison in another), except that anarchy has only worked in small groups because unless you have strict rules within each community, one bad actor can spoil an entire community of 200 people.

So after your tribe grows too large(a state) it's unsustainable without smaller communities(towns) within your tribe using bureaucracy/authority to keep people in line.

[–] masquenox@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So after your tribe grows too large(a state) it’s unsustainable

This is just a baseless trope with zero evidence to back it up - there is no theoretical upper limit on horizontal organizing. None.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What is a baseless trope? It doesn't sound like you're using "trope" correctly.

There's no theoretical upper limit to many concepts, rendering that comment irrelevant, but anarchism historically has a practical upper limit on group size and proximity. You can't indefinitely grow your population without taking logistics and territory into account, and the lack of centralized resource management necessitates territorial expansion.

It sounds like maybe you have a question. You can ask that question.

[–] masquenox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

rendering that comment irrelevant,

No, Clyde... you elevated this to "relevance" when you, with zero proof to back it up, proposed a theoretical upper limit to horizontal organizing.

You.

You can’t indefinitely grow your population without taking logistics

Oh gee... you used a big, fancy word like "logistics" that anarchists couldn't have possibly heard of in the more than hundred years of anarchist organizing and theorizing - I guess you completely owned them, huh?

[–] Prunebutt@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

More on that note in "The Dawn of Everything" by David Graeber and David Wengrow.

The book is flawed but in some points simply enlightening.

[–] Cannacheques 1 points 1 year ago

Wrong. Most people who consistently only support hierarchy without logic or critique also support laws without basis