• jrs100000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    It seems like a pretty good reason to exclude them, considering the criticism being discuss was specifically that they would inevitably decay in to a “might makes right” situation. Communities existing in a situation where police and courts would prevent someone from taking over by force disqualifies them from disproving this hypothesis.

    • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      there simply isn’t evidence of some casual mechanism by anarchist societies must decay. their hypothesis can’t be proven. I didn’t even know how it could be tested.

      • hisao@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Why this mechanism has to be casual? Nation-states exist, just imagine existing state like Russia, China or America deciding to take over your anarchist society.

      • jrs100000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I’m not sure what you want exactly. Its pretty hard to prove a negative, but that does not make the inverse true.