No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Your right, they don't have any solutions. Not all ideas are good ideas even if given a name.
Anarchism by its nature cannot work, and anything to mitigate its faults just adds some form of democratic power system, which IMO is not anarchism it's something else.
😅.
Tell that to the millions of collectives, groups and communities around the world which pretty much run on anarchist principles, they don't seem to have gotten the memo.
Barcelona, a whole city, was organized by anarchist principles during the Spanish Civil War.
I'm with you that "modern" societies (mostly ordered around nation states), as we know them, cannot be organized by anarchist principles. The world would look very different, much slower.
But then again, all seemingly insourmountable problems humanity faces today, stem from the acceleration of the current ruling economic principles, so there's that.
But that's the thing, they aren't anarchist. All of those groups you describe end up either having a power structure appointed by someone else or created by the group.
What do you think "anarchy" means? It is not "everybody does what they think", it is about how to organize societies and groups equally, by consensus.
"Anarchy is a form of society without rulers. As a type of stateless society, it is commonly contrasted with states, which are polities that claim a monopoly on violence over a permanent territory. Beyond a lack of government, it can more precisely refer to societies that lack any form of authority or hierarchy. While viewed positively by anarchists, the primary advocates of anarchy, it is viewed negatively by advocates of statism, who see it in terms of social disorder. "
I'm going to be honest, and maybe it's a difference in personal experience. But I can't even count my fingers and toes the amount of people I personally know who would immediately take advantage of that situation.
Anarchism relies on everyone playing by the rules. We already live in a state with a monopoly on violence and we still can't get everyone to play by the rules .
My main argument against anarchy as a large scale societal system is that nearly immediately bands and kingdoms would begin to form.
Humans existed in the natural order for many millions of years before modern society. Even then they adopted district forms of hierarchy again and again. It won't take long before someone tries to make themselves a king and fuck over everyone else.
I want to be clear though I believe the ideal form of government is not even close to any of the gov we have around today. So I don't want to be seen as arguing for the bullshit we are currently doing lol.
Yep. That's what I meant before. You cannot take our current world and "swap" a random constitution of a state towards something written by anarchists. That doesn't work.
That's why I pointed as an example to groups which, knowingly or unknowingly, implement anarchy in one way or the other. And I fail to see how they always transform to some hierarchical system like you wrote.
I mean, the anarchical experience that a lot of people share is a shared flat. Most wouldn't consider themselves an "anarchist flat collective", but that is what they are observed through the lense of political science. In all my shared flats we did not have any "boss", we talked about problems, found agreeable solutions for everybody by consensus and so on and so forth. That is anarchy, everybody had a say, everybody's opinion was heard and considered, agreements were formed without a powerful entity which enforced it.
And a lot of larger groups employ the same principles.
What if one your flat mates decided to start pissing on the couch instead of the toilet lol are you going to do
How come that just never happens, lol?
People generally have a harder time to be assholes to people they know. That's where this "I want to deport every brown person, except that one person I know, he's fine" mentality comes from.
What would you do if a flatmate starts pissing on the couch? Basically at one point you would decide to kick him out of your "flat society", yes. And if my flat mates all decide it is better to piss onto the couch I can decide to leave my "flat society" as well, yes.
So yes. You and your flat mates have now formed a hierarchy lol you and your flat mates on the top. Couch pisser on the bottom. It's an obtuse example but I think it reflects reality.
Your example of "I want to deport every brown person" is an perfect example of a real life couch pisser lol.
People will decide to enact their will onto others based on their personal morals. If enough people come together with the same morals they will as a group decide to form a hierarchy.
It's like if you dispersed a bunch of dust into space evenly. It'll start to clump eventually.
Any system that effectively minimize the ability for one will to destabilize the group as a whole is probably best.
Anarchism just isn't that. Its like the libertarian version of leftist policy.
Structure must exist because not everyone's wants to play fairly and not everyone needs to be worrying about that.
A group deciding that one member is not welcome anymore is no hierarchy. It doesn't structurally exploit the person "on the bottom".
It only becomes a problem where the "anarchist" shared flat meets our current society. Exiling him might not be as easy, because of outside forces (true hierarchy). He has a contract and can enforce it with outside help. Maybe he ends up homeless because he cannot afford rent, or nobody gives him another flat.
In "perfect anarchist utopia" he would go into the "couch pisser flat" and be welcomed with open arms. And why wouldn't he do it willingly? He is bound to be way happier with other couch pissers than being miserable with us, who don't want to piss onto couches.
But the example is oc mood, because once again: did that ever happen to you? As I said, people tend to follow the rules of their group. I did never encounter a couch pisser or someone like it in shared flats or other groups organized without hierarchies. And usually, once again, if I heard of those stories, it was because of outside forces. People disagreeing about means of power like money.
The concept of intrinsic shame carries far in circles, where people know each other. I mean, read up on current anthropologic research about hunter-gatherer societies. For all we know "anarchy" is the default organizational form for small groups of humans.
That all works until "couch pisser" is "murderer" or those "entrepreneur" types or someone who wants to be a "king". Or is a "manipulator"
Then you have several thousand people who like the idea of having a "king" and now you have a hierarchy.
Irrational people are more numerous then you think.
And a group that does decided a member isn't welcome anymore is a hierarchy. It doesn't require you to be exploiting the person at the bottom. I'll be it a fairly flat one but hey.
My example is extremely simple and that's on purpose. my point is you will never be able to get enough people to form little in groups where they all work together because without incentive people will just do whatever the hell they want and that small group of people can disproportionately affect the larger whole even if they are playing by your rules.
Anarchism works in small groups. But it falls apart as you scale up, by nature of the limited resources of our world some order must be kept or things will slide into chaos. Some amorphous blob of a group isn't going to be able to do that.
We departed from
and arrived at
I like that and we even agree on it 👍