• Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    3 days ago

    We can have regulatory institutions while still democratizing the economy. We don’t need capitalist-neo-feudalism to work together to protect public health, improve our educational and build infrastructure.

      • Shizrak
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        3 days ago

        No, you’re arguing against what you think anarchy is

        And your preconception is false.

        • stinky@redlemmy.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          What’s my preconception? If you’re saying it’s false, you need to be able to say what it is. Otherwise your response is without value.

          • Shizrak
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 days ago

            What’s anarchy? If you’re saying you’re against it, you need to be able to say what it is. Otherwise your response is without value.

            • stinky@redlemmy.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

              You, and, and anyone can freely discuss the definition of anarchy because it’s publicly available.

              My preconception is not. That’s why you’re wrong.

              Have the day you deserve.

          • voldage@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            You did imply nonexistence of regulatory institutions - and, to dig a bit deeper into that, anything that would sufficiently fulfill their role - in your first comment and contextualized that to anarcho syndicalism in your second, which reveals that your intent was to argue against anarcho syndicalism on the basis of it necessarily being devoid of some sort regulatory body or it’s equivalent. Even without being an anarcho syndicalist I know that to be a bogus argument, and so should you, unless you don’t know or understand it’s propositions.

            I’d compare that to a medieval farmhand claiming that the country can not survive without a king, while surviving (barely, sure, but that’s not the point) without any of the institutions you’ve mentioned and disproving your claim completely.

            Just a jab at the argument, not at you, please don’t take it too seriously. Radical changes are scary and because of that they seem impossible to attempt and absurd to discuss, but you need to remember we only have that democracy thing for a few hundred years now, and the shift to it was very radical. Sometimes it’s good to consider alternatives to systems that yeld subpar results with very weak promises of stability that are betrayed every 7 years, because you just might find the new neat thing like democracy, or at very least broaden your perspective.

            • stinky@redlemmy.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              2 days ago

              I’m free to take this seriously because it’s a serious topic. Don’t try to cover your butt by saying, “I was just kidding,” or “don’t take this seriously.” If you mean what you say, be accountable and stand up for it.

              You’re jabbing me, you say so yourself. I’m not interested in trading more barbs so I’m disengaging. Good luck with effecting change.