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

281–290 of 839 posts

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

#281

Post by Retric »

baddox wrote: post #273
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…

How are the human beings in government able to behave in a reasonable fashion without being forced to?

Who said they they aren’t forced to. Specific individuals clearly can act reasonably on their own. It’s groups where you need control and systems of government influence those in power. Democracy’s clearly force winning some elections, but even dictatorship means relying on the military, police, and taxation etc.

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

#282

Post by galaxyLogic »

Anarchism is not the answer. Democracy and extreme transparency of governance is.

Anarchism doesn't start with the right question which is: "How can we maximize the total average good for all people". Anarchism starts with "How can people live without rules imposed on them by others?"

The idea that eliminating all rules imposed by others would produce maximal average good for people is suspect, and has no real justifications proposed for it. It assumes that every person could have the consciousness of what is in the best interests of everyone, and then would always choose to follow the guidance of such information.

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

#283

Post by username90 »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #271
waihtis wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I thought this was funny too. I literally read the same sentence and thought to myself: "ok, I am definitely not an anarchist.

So you only make reasonable choices because you are forced to?

Would you pay the same amount of tax as you do today if you weren't forced? Do you believe others would? Do you think that having taxes to pay for school and roads is unreasonable?

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

#284

Post by dTal »

baddox wrote: post #273
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…

How are the human beings in government able to behave in a reasonable fashion without being forced to?

Parent addresses this explicitly:

>not because politicians are any better than the average person, but because they tend to have at least a bare minimum of education, access to advisors, some positive incentives -the next election- and no high stakes on the decision like, say, a bar owner

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

#285

Post by elindbe2 »

"The first is that human beings are, under ordinary circumstances, about as reasonable and decent as they are allowed to be"

I'd like to try and understand Graeber's argument but I get stuck here. If you take one glance at history with all of its various wars, raids, riots, revolutions, etc I can't see how one could sustain this claim. For example, did Ghengis Khan act about as reasonable and decent as he was allowed to be?

This points to a larger problem I see with much if today's social commentary: taking the existence of an advanced civilization for granted. If you believe that today's society is inevitable and indestructible then you don't need to put any effort into sustaining it and can simply change anything you wish without worrying about the consequences to civilization.

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

#286

Post by Nursie »

sudosysgen wrote: post #252
Nursie wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And where in the world has it played out like this? Instead of examples of peaceful anarchism, the history of the world is full of examples showing that those with the will to use violence use it for their own ends, form gangs, and militias, become warlords...

Sure, the Zapatistas, the Apoists, and a few indigenous anarchist groups. Forming gangs and militias is difficult when the status quo is good for most people resulting the majority being willing to use violence to avoid being ruled by gangs and warlords.

The zapatistas amd apoists appear to be effectively democratic militia, existing in opposition to outside oppressors.

The body of your post there seems effectively to be historically illiterate.

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

#287

Post by galaxyLogic »

username90 wrote: post #275
chmod600 wrote: post #262

"For thousands of years people lived without governments. In many parts of the world people live outside of the control of governments today. They do not all kill each other." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_savage

Tribal societies have hierarchies and laws, they are not anarchies.

And they attack kill and steal from other tribes

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

#288

Post by sudosysgen »

tuesdayrain wrote: post #243
sudosysgen wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so you agree that it's better for you to have very limited power and exist without authority, in which case you'd have to confirm to most social norms or suffer consequences, than for authority to exist and for people like you to accede to it? Because in our system, if you were to accumulate enough authority it wouldn't be in your interest anymore to follow laws.

It's only better for me in an idealistic scenario where my local militia succeeds. If a bigger and stronger one comes around then my life could quickly become horrible.

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.

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

#289

Post by chmod600 »

Simple question:

Two families both like that big house in the prime location. Who gets it?

The one that slept there last night? The one that built it? The most obnoxious family so that they can drive the others away?

Without laws, the result will probably be the latter, no?

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

#290

Post by surfpel »

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…

While I’m also not an anarchist, I don’t believe these are good examples. In fact, they could be an argument for anarchism.

With a lack of stimulus or even just in this economic system, bars and businesses in general are incentivized to stay open. They are being ‘coerced’ to stay open.

People started rejecting masks and shutdowns en masse after astroturfing and media convinced them to.

There are countries where orders were followed voluntarily and good results followed.

Post reply on HN