Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000) • Hacker News Board

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#381

Post by solipsism » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:47 PM UTC

mynameishere wrote: post #369

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #209

I have never believed in anarchism, as I don't believe that "human beings are capable of behaving in a reasonable fashion without having to be forced to". But with COVID-19, I am seeing more proof than ever. In my country (but I guess it's the same in most, except perhaps some Nordic countries) bars, pubs and discos only reduce seating or close indoor spaces when forced to by law, in spite of the evidence that they c…

So tell us, how many months of mask wearing would be "reasonable"? We're up to about six in my locale. Would twelve be reasonable? Eighteen? Until the virus is gone? That would require, most likely, eternal mask wearing, even with a vaccine. Why don't you lecture us about "reasonable" behavior some more.

The same amount is reasonable as the requirement to wear clothes.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#382

Post by RandoHolmes » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:47 PM UTC

komali2 wrote: post #360

RandoHolmes wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I regularly volunteer at conventions. Somewhere between 90 and 95% of people follow the rules without much prompting. 5-10% of people don't... This was my problem with the article. Yes, most people do act exactly as you say. But what if you get that entitled asshole who does actually cut in line? Because there are people out there who will do that. Now what do you do? Resort to mob justice? There's a segment of the…

This happens today, what do we do about it today? Are laws preventing mass shooters? Sociopathic killers?

The answer is yes.

I'll never understand why so many people believe that if something isn't perfect, it's broken.

All one has to do is read a single article discussing law enforcement finding and preventing a bomb or a shooter to know that our laws are, in fact, preventing these scenarios. They're just not preventing all of the them.

And you know what? That's good. Freedom has inherent risk. I don't want to live in a society where we're so unfree that our laws are able to prevent all crime.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#383

Post by zingplex » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:47 PM UTC

INTPenis wrote: post #21

A swedish rapper said in 1998; "Den enda sanna demokraten är anarkist", translates to "the only true democrat is anarchist". Not meaning the Democratic party in the US but rather a literal interpretation of the two words. Democrat meaning rule of the people and anarchist meaning no leaders. I was raised to believe in anarchism, and I still do at heart. But if it were ever to work we'd need strict and global regulatio…

> I was raised to believe in anarchism, and I still do at heart. But if it were ever to work we'd need strict and global regulations on centralized power that would need to be upheld by a coalition which would itself become a centralized power.

Murray Bookchin argued for this in what he called Democratic Confederalism, which would create a series of federated communes with the administrative tasks being undertaken collectively by the confederal network whilst policy would be dictated by the communes themselves. The confederal network would have the right to break up centralized power as it develops in one or several of the communes as well as protect human rights and prevent ecological destruction.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#384

Post by notso00 » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:48 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #318

badmeasure99 wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Measuring our capacity for anarchist living in a cutthroat capitalist society is sort of like comparing an apple with a black hole. You can come up with some vague emotional colors where they can seem similar, I mean they both exist, can be represented on paper starting with base geometrical shapes, but further analysis of their composition and parts reveals a lot of differences. It’s not a given that bars and salons…

there's no world with humans in it that's devoid of power and coercion, so the premise of anarchism is irretrievably flawed. can it inform how we live in a power-filled and coercive world? yes, but not to any extreme.

True but also not true.

Anarchism isn’t devoid of understanding of reality.

Anarchisms goal as a broad social meme is to not allow an official body that coerces the public towards further erecting of tent pole power structures within society. Like we have a Constitution and abdicate legislative work to a mythical free market, where an Amazon size entity can manipulate the labor and retail markets on a whim.

It seeks to establish a tent pole hierarchy based, at least the sources I agree with offer it something like this, and then within that it’s local communal rules. No influencers from DC enforcing proper life in collusion with their moneyed brethren on this coast, regardless of how the masses would spend their time.

But yes at the top it’s a tent pole like any other.

Trying to set aside physics itself isn’t the goal of anarchism. Don’t be ridiculous.

Pre-Columbus America’s are often mythologized as all hippie, but they were probably the purest anarchist society we can study.

Those who lived by the water fished and maintained the coast. Those inland made tools for doing that.

And we’re talking communities that could rival them contemporary Europe.

How complex we all think it is to change when really it’s just doing away with European notion of proper social hierarchy always leading back to a council of especially wise men whose wisdom was point guns first.

It’s an emotional attitude like capitalism. Neither are laws of physics. Just a personal attitude that one will not be a social control freak nor kowtow to them.

We have none of the old problems of logistical distribution. Why do we their old tenets and rules?

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#385

Post by sudosysgen » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:49 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #322

sudosysgen wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should consider the issues of iteratively improving the same code base, pushing to prod for hundreds of years! Primate dominance hierarchies are weak, accountable, and constantly challenged, and not even necessary in humans which exhibit other behaviors depending on nature. As a consequences, hierarchy is not necessary in humans and not inherent. That being said, there are ways to move into anarchism that aren't…

I'd be curious where anarchism was applied on a large scale for more than a generation and the result was good. Regarding the code analogy, I'd rather have a million pushes to prod than one huge force push that rewrites history;-)

But as I said, it's possible to transition to anarchy. You don't need to do it in one bit push. The issue is when the underlying code base is so bad that there is nothing else, but we can certainly try incrementalism.

In theory, there's no reason you couldn't go towards and anarchic society via a million small reforms, but in practice you get executed for using your already existing rights if you state that your goal is to do such reforms.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#386

Post by username90 » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

simoom22 wrote: post #366

auggierose wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anarchy means that the law of the strongest rules. Not sure why you think that this is somehow aligned with non-violence.

That's the opposite of anarchy. An-arch-y means a situation without fixed power structures.

You can't prevent bad guys from forming their own power structure without some form of power structure.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#387

Post by sudosysgen » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

username90 wrote: post #304

sudosysgen wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd a bigger and stronger far away stranger militia wanted to come and invade you it wouldn't matter if you had authority or not.

It matters a lot if the authority is big enough that a random militia cannot topple them. A lone village can be raided with impunity, id the village is a part of a big country then soldiers will move in to protect them.

There is no reason to have such a small authorities. Anarchic societies managed to maintain armies strong enough to deter state actors. It comes with some small sacrifices, but it's still much better than otherwise.

In practice, your village can come to an agreement with other small villages and do military exercises together while still maintaining autonomy, and you can then maintain complex weapon systems and large armies.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#388

Post by boomboomsubban » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

username90 wrote: post #344

boomboomsubban wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an example of voluntary association. They chose to gain the benefits of the union, they need to pay the dues.

My point is that voluntary donations isn't enough to run much at all, even for organizations that the worker is in control of. And a society needs roads. How would you ensure people pay for roads in an anarchist society? Would you have toll booths everywhere? That isn't economically feasible. Donations? As I said that isn't even enough to pay for a worker union, roads needs more than that.

Voluntary association, not voluntary donations. People need roads, when this problem is brought up they will be willing to pay for roads. If you are unwilling, you aren't part of the society anymore.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#389

Post by cortesoft » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

Here is my argument against anarchism as some alternative to what we have.

We ARE living in the end state of anarchism. We know how people will organize when there is no existing coercive power structure; they will form themselves into groups with rules and laws and enforcement. How do we know this? Because it is what people have done, over and over and over, when in that situation.

If all of the government were to suddenly disappear, groups would start to form, power would collect and disperse and reorganize, and certain people who are very good at that game (or have the right allies) will rise to leadership. The end result will be some sort of stable-ish arrangement of groups who control different areas and... here we are.

Re: Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you (2000)

#390

Post by andi999 » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 4:51 PM UTC

__s wrote: post #120

oblio wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to behave better in the presence of authority, they are forced to, that's kind of the point of authority :-)

Unfortunately authority doesn't behave better in the presence of itself

Actually it does, just better training required. I believe the police in Germany is pretty good, but you need at least 3 years (not month) of training.