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
This is a very interesting comment, thank you.
Thats really cool. Can you elaborate on this? I’ve never heard of anarchist Ukraine or the Chipas
The idea is that once you're organized in more or less little entities, you may still have the need for things your entity cannot provide (that's one of the common first argument against anarchism) : tools, resources, craftsmanship, etc. To answer this, the most obvious solution is to federate with other close communities to share what's needed : you get together (or send delegates) and establish what the needs are and what can be provided. The same principle can be replicated to those federation to create wide networks.
In Ukraine, which was very rural, they organized in little agricultural communes, as well as workers committees in factory and district assemblies for self governance. They then gathered in a common Congress to discuss matters for the whole region, to make propositions that were then discussed in the local councils. The anarchist army also played a big practical role, taking decisions for logistics in between Congresses, though they were not free to do what they wanted, and they tried to intervene in Congresses only as advisors. Their actual role is discussed, mainly by pro-state people claiming that they were the centralized entity that kept everything alive.
In Chiapas, i don't know that much, but i believe they organize in villages, grouped in Communes, grouped in local governments (Caracoles if i'm not mistaken). Each level has some people elected to organize votes and debates with each assembly. The upper level need agreements of lower levels to apply things. Imagine if every town needed to vote for decisions applied to a region, and there was no mayors in the towns. Same thing here, there is an army alongside the movment, and it's not 100% clear if they, as they claim, have no say in the political decisions, or if they unofficially have some form of governance. Though i have not seen much claims that they do such things, and it's also one of the most devoted to peoole army that i know of.
To add a bit more context, there is an army in both cases because of the very violent context : nationalist and then bolchevik armies in Ukraine, state violence and cartels in Chiapas. Both are relatively short (few years for ukraine, few decades for Chiapas). And also, zapatistas in Chiapas reject the notion and term of anarchism, though they are relatively close in pure theory.
That’s interesting that they managed to have armies while doing that. How would that work? An army without top-down command seems unstable, it seems like they could easily seize control of the local communes if they wanted to
Well, those armies are not 100% pure anarchist systems, and my phrasing was misleading if you understood that. They were conventional armies, with some anarchist principles included. Most notables principles i knew of were self-discipline (soldiers were expected to watch their behaviours and their officers/comrades too) and election of officers (so they could be revoked and changed when soldiers lost trust).
The efficiency of such armies is very discuted : ukrainian anarchist were quite effective against nationalist armies (a fight in which they were partly helped by bolcheviks armies), but were half-destroyed, half-integrated by the Red Army once Ukraine was freed. Other than that, the military activities of the EZLN show a relative efficiency, but they struggle to prevent cartel violence. And the efficiency of anarchist in Spanish resistance (1936) is quite disputed, some stalinists blaming them for the defeat in the civil war against fascism, while other blame the stalinists who ended up arresting/disbanding anarchists (anyway, the massive help from nazi Germany and fascist Italy and the lack of support from France/UK / weak support of USSR probably was one main reason).
On a purely speculative side, I personnaly feel much safe about armies with some anarchist principles not seizing control of local communities, since the soldiers would be encouraged to disband/oppose in those cases. The anarchist army in Ukraine, the Makhnovchtchina, was known for executing its soldiers caught looting or iniating pogroms. So it shows that those armies had the same problems than the others (giving power to people), but they also had some drastic approach about it (you have to fight abuse of power strictly). Clearly a rather bad thing overall, but a bit better than other armies to my eyes, especially at the time.
That’s interesting. I didn’t realize there was so much history behind this. Thanks for sharing