Pëtr Kropotkin and Mutual Aid

Post by throwayyy479087 » Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 4:17 PM UTC

lghh wrote: post #91

throwayyy479087 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The big question is can we have a functioning society with less human domination and how far can we reduce it? No, not with any scale. This has been tried and tried and tried. It's a nice idea, but like most of leftism, only works on paper. I wish the people that argue for things like the destruction of the family would instead push for universal healthcare. That's at least doable.

Big jump from "less human domination" to "destruction of the family" that you're making.

Post by Deprogrammer9 » Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 4:36 PM UTC

Post by ausbah » Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 5:02 PM UTC

greenie_beans wrote: post #86

serverholic wrote: post #79

Anarchism is an interesting topic, and learning about it has lead me down some interesting paths of learning and thought. At its core, it’s the position of being against hierarchies of power where humans dominate those with less power. In simple terms, it’s being against humans dominating each other. The big question is can we have a functioning society with less human domination and how far can we reduce it? That’s…

agreed. the human nature argument is a lazy one against something like anarchism or any other alternative system. if we can be socialized to seek money (it starts with the piggy bank when we're like 4 years old), we can be socialized to not seek those things and instead seek something else. replace "money" or "greed" with any negative way that humans behave, like power or domination.

Post by ausbah » Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 5:08 PM UTC

schizo89 wrote: post #95

serverholic wrote: post #79

Anarchism is an interesting topic, and learning about it has lead me down some interesting paths of learning and thought. At its core, it’s the position of being against hierarchies of power where humans dominate those with less power. In simple terms, it’s being against humans dominating each other. The big question is can we have a functioning society with less human domination and how far can we reduce it? That’s…

As most things in life, it's just the surface meaning. The actual idea is denying that history have any power over an individual. There's been number of historic personalities, such a Napoleon Bonapart that gave rise to a though that maybe individual have no power over historic process and history is pre-determined. Anarchism is about denying that fatalism and branching your own fork in history where no historic proc…

Post by cuteboy19 » Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

jrochkind1 wrote: post #85

cuteboy19 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There would be no point in competing with someone who has the same genes as you since it is the genes that drive evolution. Going further, the more different the genes the more you would want to compete. So this means that you would cooperate most with your parents then your siblings, then your family, tribe, race and species.

That is not Kropotkin's analysis; it is a very commonplace current "evolutionary psychology" analysis (as well as probably a common 19th century "social darwinism" analysis!) I don't really want to get into the whole argument here -- it's one of those that we will go on forever with. But the Kropotkin point of view would probably point out that humans as a species (and any species, in fact) have improved survivabilit…