pull down to refresh

At their very simplest, anarchist beliefs turn on to two elementary assumptions. The first is that human beings are, under ordinary circumstances, about as reasonable and decent as they are allowed to be, and can organize themselves and their communities without needing to be told how. The second is that power corrupts. Most of all, anarchism is just a matter of having the courage to take the simple principles of common decency that we all live by, and to follow them through to their logical conclusions. Odd though this may seem, in most important ways you are probably already an anarchist — you just don’t realize it.
Most anarchists start with beliefs like these ime. He makes a kind of naive argument using the socratic method, as pro-state beliefs mostly appear when asking questions about coordinating at scale, but he takes a small stab at that near the end:
Now, you might object that all this is well and good as a way for small groups of people to get on with each other, but managing a city, or a country, is an entirely different matter. And of course there is something to this. Even if you decentralize society and put as much power as possible in the hands of small communities, there will still be plenty of things that need to be coordinated, from running railroads to deciding on directions for medical research. But just because something is complicated does not mean there is no way to do it democratically. It would just be complicated. In fact, anarchists have all sorts of different ideas and visions about how a complex society might manage itself. To explain them though would go far beyond the scope of a little introductory text like this. Suffice it to say, first of all, that a lot of people have spent a lot of time coming up with models for how a really democratic, healthy society might work; but second, and just as importantly, no anarchist claims to have a perfect blueprint. The last thing we want is to impose prefab models on society anyway. The truth is we probably can’t even imagine half the problems that will come up when we try to create a democratic society; still, we’re confident that, human ingenuity being what it is, such problems can always be solved, so long as it is in the spirit of our basic principles — which are, in the final analysis, simply the principles of fundamental human decency.
Anarchism working at scale seems undecided to me. One thing I am decided on, however, is that better coordination tech will make scaling anarchism better whether anarchism is feasible today or not.
this territory is moderated
275 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 11h
Anarchism is one of the most misunderstood philosophies. Even more than libertarianism. I see a massive difference in response when I describe it vs use the label. Most think of masked men throwing molitov cocktails. Over the years I have found many anarchists through the years and they are not throwing anything. Cool people. Smart people. Curious people. People that look at the world and think something is not right.
The shortest explainion I like is "No rulers, not no rules".
I may not fit the mold but I agree with most anarchists on most things. As a Christian this puts me in a special category with my brothers in Christ. But there have been many Christian anarchists through the years. It aligns just fine with Jesus teaching IMO.
I often tell my fellow believers I have "no King but Christ". The modern state seems to me to be a religious system of its own. But that's a whole over topic.
reply
Totally. Tech has definitely reduced the optimal size of everything, so yeah why not governance too.
This resonates with me personally:
Most of all, anarchism is just a matter of having the courage to take the simple principles of common decency that we all live by, and to follow them through to their logical conclusions. Odd though this may seem, in most important ways you are probably already an anarchist — you just don’t realize it.
reply
It's interesting that on the scale people are familiar with and understand, they accept that you don't need someone bossing everyone around under threat of violence.
It's only when they start abstracting to levels they don't understand and aren't familiar with that they lose confidence in people's ability to coordinate and cooperate.
reply
33 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 9h
It's only when they start abstracting to levels they don't understand and aren't familiar with that they lose confidence in people's ability to coordinate and cooperate.
I guess that's not surprising, but it is mighty interesting. "I don't understand this thing, so let's impose structures I do understand." (Or, "that I think I understand.")
reply
19 sats \ 0 replies \ @Shugard 8h
Most people don't understand anarchism, they often misunderstand it as chaos or violence, but it is fundamentally about self-organization, voluntary cooperation, and resisting the corrupting influence of power. That's the self-responsibility we should all strive for!
reply
24 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 10h
A good book to explore:
reply
23 sats \ 0 replies \ @Aardvark 11h
I really started warming up to anarchism lately, the more I get into bitcoin, the more reason I find to hate the government.
Here's where I take issue, and please someone correct me if I'm wrong, I honestly enjoy learning.
Wouldn't an anarchist society ways be in danger of being overrun by a neighbor with a government. The neighbor can print unlimited fiat and steal as much as they want through inflation, how does an anarchist society compete with an authoritarian government?
reply
I consider myself a voluntarist. We are about the same as anarchists because neither of us believes that he state is good for anything besides theft, murder and kidnapping. People can handle all of it privately on a voluntary basis. Justice can even be meted out by the voluntarism principles. The non aggression principle is one of the bedrocks of both. Well, perhaps voluntarism is the same as anarchism (but anarchists have a really bad rep).
reply
I also like the voluntarist label and use it often. One of the reasons I like it is that people don't already have a sense of what it is, so they have to actually think about my description of it.
I'd say it's a sub-category of anarchism. There are anarchists who are fine with violent expropriation and "voluntarism" sets us apart from them.
reply
Yes, there are all too many people who did their murder that got classified as “Anarchist” for my tastes. Also, the NAP is a very strong feature in workable societies, but not the state. FTS!!
reply
32 sats \ 2 replies \ @Satosora 12h
Anarchists are usually the people on the wrong side of power and are being oppressed in some way.. I remember being told a long time ago that during ww2, the resistance movement were anarchists. Makes you think for a minute.
reply
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @Skipper 12h
people on the wrong side of power
What does this mean?
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 11h
Usually it means people who oppose the government.
reply
"do it democratically"
"a really democratic, healthy society"
"no anarchist claims to have a perfect blueprint"
"principles of fundamental human decency"
This guy sounds more utopian than an anarchist
reply
Javier Milei will show to the world that Anarcho Capitalism works in practice and at large scale. His beginning is just paving the way for a global renew
reply
I don’t quite think that an Anarcho-Capitalist would be the man in charge of the state in any country. He may be something else but, I think not an A-C.
reply
i agree, we can't fit AnarCap into existing power structures, one of the key principles is Rejection of the state, Milei is still part of the state
Milei would need to somehow devour the system from within-not just nibble at the edges, but go all in and replace the old with the new.
reply
He says he despises the state and among his plans are cutting 90% of all taxes, a 90% ancap will lead us into 100% Anarcho capitalism still, we just need the results to speak by themselves
reply
20 sats \ 7 replies \ @Skipper 7h
To be honest, I'm not optimistic, it's a tight timeframe, and even if he does succeed, it's one election awayy from a leftist candidate winning and somehow roll back all his progress
reply
11 sats \ 5 replies \ @Skipper 7h
if you let people vote, it will always lead to: less freedoms, less privacy, higher taxes, bigger gov
reply
I’m not sure of that, but I agree with Bastiat: The state is everyone trying to live at the expense of everyone else.
reply
that would never happen in "our democracy" based on "fundamental human decency"
<cough, cough>
reply
Wow, I just broke out with whooping cough!
I agree with that one. The lefty/Marxist/socialist/communist/murderers just have to rouse the populace’s envy and greed and they are off to the races again. Until we find a way to defeat envy and greed, nothing will change. Perhaps the only way to defeat envy and greed is to have abundance of everything. Then, we would only have greed for power to deal with.
reply
10% is 10%! If I were to put a gun to your head and demand 10% of your property, would that be ancap? I don’t think so.
reply
Well I already have a gun on my head that says pay 50% tax, 10% of my property is as ancap as it gets! And that was deemed impossible until the Milei phenomenon, in the future 100% ancap will be the new normal
reply
The only change is the slave collar you wear is slightly smaller and lighter. However, the slave collar is still firmly attached to you and locked around your neck.
reply
If everyone feels a lighter and smaller collar at the same time, they will want even less of it, this is why I believe Milei will pave the way to 100% freedom if his project succeeds, most people don't feel the weight of the collar until it is lighter, then they are like "holy fuck that thing was heavy on me before"
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Skipper 7h
exactly. taxation is theft, doesn't matter if it's 50%, 10%, or even 1%, theft is theft
reply
for a second i read 'are you the antichrist'
reply
13 sats \ 1 reply \ @Imyourfed 12h
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Skipper 8h
😆
reply