Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

theanarchistlibrary.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 839 posts

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

#641

Post by jchook »

SilasX wrote: post #558
jchook wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That said, locking people in cages, treating them with inhumanity and violence, then releasing them into a world where they now have a harder time functioning in society and finding legitimate work doesn’t sound like a genius plan to solve psychopaths.

That's an argument for having more humane prisons, not for abolishing prisons in the sense of "place where you are confined from interaction with the non-sociopaths until you can be less sociopathic".

In an ideal world prisons would look so unlike our prisons that we wouldn’t call them prisons anymore.

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

#642

Post by b112 »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #610
b112 wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethical_Treatme... You cannot oppose all animal testing, say it is morally wrong under all circumstances, then ... because you're fighting to end it, say in your special little case -- it is OK. PETA representatives have often said that killing animals, is not worth saving one human life. Such broken logic indicates that this person thinks that they are special. They aren'…

It feels perfectly consistent to say that we ultimately need to end animal testing but it is okay to use animal products for your literal survival in the meantime. Perhaps they don’t have such a position. But it feels pretty wrong headed to me to mock PETA because a diabetic uses insulin rather than take heed to their very real and very important message about the abuse of animals in our society. It feels like you’re…

That's not what PETA says, though. They say, animal testing is NEVER EVER EVER OK. Ever.

They have further stated that using animal tested products is 100% morally wrong. Except, of course, for Special People which are 'in the fight'.

This is far different from saying "We need to work to end animal testing".

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

#643

Post by haroldp »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #631
haroldp wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ancaps believe that street wars would be notably unprofitable, and competing "rights enforcement agencies" would quickly normalize their relations with one another, in the same way that we don't see Uber and Lyft shooting each other up. > in what way would private police be different from a Mafia? If you didn't like the service you were getting, you could stop paying for it.

Tons of crimes meaningfully cross geographic boundaries. > in the same way that we don't see Uber and Lyft shooting each other up. Do I need to point out the obvious here? Uber and Lyft are subject to whatever states they operate in, including those police forces. The ancap police forces you're talking about would be subject to...what, exactly?

> Do I need to point out the obvious here? Uber and Lyft are subject to whatever states they operate in, including those police forces.

Would you still give Uber money if they were shooting up Lyft?

> The ancap police forces you're talking about would be subject to...what, exactly?

The voluntary support of their subscribers.

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

#644

Post by null000 »

drblast wrote: post #538

I think in many ways it's impossible to have this discussion with a U.S. audience. The idea of force and violence being the solution to everything is deeply, deeply ingrained in U,S, culture. Simply suggesting that reason and cooperation can solve some of the problems we in the U.S. attempt to solve with more violence is usually met with the "starship troopers" ideology that violence is the actual source of legitimac…

I blame religion. Not all religion, not every religious person, and not exclusively, but looking back - there was a strong emphasis that "we're all awful people really at our core, and the only reason anyone is half decent to anyone is because they don't want to burn in hellfire" in my religious teachings (protestant Wesleyan, primarily).

I bought into that for a long time. Then I dropped religion, and realized I didn't really want to be an awful person, just as a rule of thumb. It wasn't too much of a jump to realize most people weren't awful most of the time, and it's only a handful that, for whatever reason, didn't get the memo. Even if many people manage to convince themselves otherwise.

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

#645

Post by jessaustin »

acephal wrote: post #626
noodle wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when there isn't those built hierarchies bad/selfish people don't amass power so everyone else can actually handle them on equal terms. This doesn't really ring true to me. In a society where hierarchy is removed, the bad people will form a hierarchy to create power. It being "not allowed" in that society doesn't mean it won't still happen, due again to the people being "bad" in the first place. Two bad people will…

This is the problem with much of the spectrum of political rhetoric in America, they're almost all somehow unrealistic in their basic, shared presumption of a world without some over-determining Other (a black box concept that is somehow causal of all social woes) is the goal: feminists, a world without patriarchy, anarchists, a world without hierarchy, Nazis and White Supremacists, a world without racial degeneratio…

Actual feminists and anarchists have more nuanced views than you present here. (I confess I don't know enough "Nazis and White Supremacists" to say; perhaps they are just that simplistic. Nice implicit comparison, though!) It seems that upon hearing "let's have less X", you can't get past your instinct that X is the basis of all imaginable human life.

It is to your credit that you haven't had a similar reaction to those who oppose racism.

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

#646

Post by mhuffman »

twblalock wrote: post #604
TulliusCicero wrote: post #354

> Anarchists are simply people who believe human beings are capable of behaving in a reasonable fashion without having to be forced to. It is really a very simple notion. This can sound reasonable when you think of it in terms of, " most people behaving in a reasonable fashion, most of the time". But anarchists don't want to eliminate hierarchical use of force for most cases, but for all of them. Any time I've heard…

> Any time I've heard anarchists try to explain how they would deal with the subset of people who are just real shitty in various ways, the responses have been either, a) in our utopia, you wouldn't have those problems, because hierarchy causes all of them, or b) increasingly convoluted and implausible-sounding ways to deal with crazy assholes without using force. I see similar bad/evasive arguments from prison aboli…

> Those are not consequences of modern society or government.

In fact, the fear of those are the reason for government!

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

#647

Post by esperent »

agumonkey wrote: post #590
amscanne wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other flaw with that example is that there is obvious social pressure. If you try to cut the line, people will likely confront you. Situations where there’s no social pressure are different. During University, I was a believer in co-ops as a form of organization. I lived in and was actively involved in student housing co-ops. During grad school, I lived in a large house with 12 other people. I was the house organ…

Have you had the bliss of being frowned upon twice during covid ? by wearing a mask before others agreed, and then forgetting it (left in the car by accident kind) after society decided it was important ?

Nobody would frown on me for wearing a mask where I live, even before covid.

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

#648

Post by haroldp »

haroldp wrote: post #447
TulliusCicero wrote: post #354

> Anarchists are simply people who believe human beings are capable of behaving in a reasonable fashion without having to be forced to. It is really a very simple notion. This can sound reasonable when you think of it in terms of, " most people behaving in a reasonable fashion, most of the time". But anarchists don't want to eliminate hierarchical use of force for most cases, but for all of them. Any time I've heard…

For what it's worth, anarcho-capitalists substantially agree with this collectivist anarchist, but still consider police worthwhile for your edge cases. They just want to voluntarily pay for private policing instead of having a monopoly impose it.

Negative karma for stating a fact? Does someone disagree that this is what AnCaps believe? Or do we just suppress heterodox ideas here?

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

#649

Post by mhuffman »

jlawson wrote: post #536
jchook wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That said, locking people in cages, treating them with inhumanity and violence, then releasing them into a world where they now have a harder time functioning in society and finding legitimate work doesn’t sound like a genius plan to solve psychopaths.

It's easy to criticize without suggesting any alternative.

The typical suggested alternative is "treatment", ie. hospital -jail!

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

#650

Post by wellplayed76 »

anarch1c wrote: post #102
oxymoran wrote: post #11

“Anarchists are simply people who believe human beings are capable of behaving in a reasonable fashion without having to be forced to.” My anarchist sympathies want this to be true but this is a demonstrably false fairy tale. Just look at how we treat the planet and other living things in the presence of lawful order. Why would you assume that we would act righteously in the absence of law? It is painfully obvious th…

I’m curious what makes you so sure the laws on the books are what’s keeping the majority of billions from randomly shooting each other. Just because laws exist doesn’t mean they’re what’s keeping your neighbors from randomly gunning you down given they could snap biologically despite the law. Anarchism doesn’t mean no laws or rules. Anarchism as a lawless violent mess is the movie version. One could even keep the Con…

How do rules get enforced? Who enforces them? Who decides who enforces? Do rule enforcers therefore have power over other people? What if people, or large groups of people don't like the rules and refuse to follow them?
Post reply on HN