• DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Anarchism directly leads to a form of government,

    yes, and anarchism never claimed otherwise.

    What you’re deliberately ignoring is that anarchists organise horizontally, not from the top down, and also that capitalism is inherently incompatible with anarchism since it demands hierarchy, and hierarchy is what anarchism opposes.
    So basically your entire snide and ill informed comment here is irrelevant, since you clearly just pulled a bunch of propaganda out of your ass and have never spent more than 30 seconds researching what anarchism actually is.

    And yet I’m sure you feel super proud of yourself.
    Clown.

    • TopShelfVanilla
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nothing gets your point across like finishing on an ad hominem. Good job. You showed them and they will totally see things your way now.

    • deafboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The society won’t work without hierarchies. The important thing is to not forcefully involve other people in your hierarchy.

      Nobody wants to organize horizontally.

      • cacheson@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nobody wants to organize horizontally.

        Yet you’re posting this on a rapidly growing horizontally-organized social media system, running on top of a wildly successful, half-century old, horizontally-organized global computer network governed by “rough consensus and running code”. Curious.

        Obligatory “I am very smart”

        • deafboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          horizontally-organized social media system

          Even the fediverse feels like a bunch of hierarchies. Some have a council with code of conduct on top, some have a benevolent dictator. As a user, you have very little say in the relationships between the large instances. It’s easier to become a sovereign instance at the moment, compared to the dark times of twitter and reddit, but as soon as the large instances decide not to federate with the world by default, you’re back to square one. It’s very similar to citizen vs country, and country vs country interaction.

          half-century old, horizontally-organized global computer network

          I’d say that only Tier 1 networks are horizontally managed. The name itself implies a hierarchy. There is an organization on top granting AS’s to legal entities, and assigning IP addresses to them. An average ISP customer has absolutely no say about what happens higher up in the hierarchy.

          Sure, you can try to bootstrap a flat network, but that has it’s own disadvantages. And I’m saying that as a member of a project trying to build a meshnet using network protocols with more or less flat topology. (Disaster radio, Meshtastic, Reticulum).

    • Square Singer@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, I’ve never heard of a well-informed anarchist either, so there you go.

      They just don’t understand any of the basics of organisation.

      They just base their whole ideology on the delusion that everybody’s just gonna play nice, nobody will want to do anything for their advantage and, cucially, that crime just doesn’t exist.

      I wanna see how any anarchist society deals with a murder. Or with someone who is dangerously mentally ill.

      But that’s already much too high for anarchists, who barely understand basic human incentives.

      • cacheson@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, I’ve never heard of a well-informed anarchist either, so there you go.

        They just don’t understand any of the basics of organisation.

        It sounds like you haven’t had much interaction with anarchists beyond maybe high-school, and haven’t read anything that we’ve written.

        Also, police organizations complain that anarchist activist groups are too hard to infiltrate because there’s too much reading to do:

        Infiltration is made more difficult by the communal nature of the lifestyle (under constant observation and scrutiny) and the extensive knowledge held by many anarchists, which require a considerable amount of study and time to acquire.

        Literally “I can’t blend in with these fucking nerds because they read too much”.

        They just base their whole ideology on the delusion that everybody’s just gonna play nice, nobody will want to do anything for their advantage and, cucially, that crime just doesn’t exist.

        Our philosophy is centered around dealing with the organized crime of the state and the exploitation of the capitalists. If you generally can’t trust people to play nice, putting a few of them in positions of power tends to make the problem worse, not better.

        I wanna see how any anarchist society deals with a murder.

        Which aspect of it? Basic security is pretty simple, and there’s a number of ways to provision it. Forensics would be handled by contracting professional specialists. Trials would be handled by a polycentric legal system (as opposed to the monocentric one that we currently have. Punishment would generally be in the form of either restitution paid by the perpetrator to the victim (or next of kin), or exile.

        But that’s already much too high for anarchists, who barely understand basic human incentives.

        C’mon now, this is just confidentlyincorrect material.