![I was banned from [email protected] for "being a unibomber apologist"](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/aace2475-7a38-41ff-ae62-15fb41b19977.png){kind=link}
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. @[email protected] and other mods, I am very upset
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)
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.
until an anarchist comes along who thinks those rules are stupid.
I dont know
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.
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.