Anarchism, Arguments For and Against

[Farnhamia]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

I like glasses, beer, and a low child mortality rate personally.

Antibiotics and distilled beverages.

[Prima Scriptura]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

I would be dead in a anarcho-primitivism society. Because all of my health problems, I need modern, western medicine and technology to survive.

[Jewish Underground State]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

Humanity is really stupid some times. But that doesn't mean we should give up. Because if we can put our minds to it we can be smart. Look at this thread. People are having their ideas challenged. With this people grow smarter.

Humanity can be really stupid or smart.

[Adamede]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

Considering how violent life was for many hunter gatherer communties, not to mention food security not being a thing, yah I'm good.

[Prima Scriptura]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

Considering how violent life was for many hunter gatherer communties, not to mention food security not being a thing, yah I'm good.

I notice a trait that advocates of anarcho-primitivism have. When you point out the irony of them using modern technology, the internet, they flip the fuck out

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

If you entered anarcho-primitivism, you would have to allow billions to die of hunger and disease. Because of that, many anprims talk about a gradual decline, but virtually nobody would comply (actually, this is a problem with the ideology as whole (actually, this is a problem with anarchism in general)) and it would take too long. and how many people are actually capable of surviving in the wilderness anymore?

[Prima Scriptura]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

If you entered anarcho-primitivism, you would have to allow billions to die of hunger and disease. Because of that, many anprims talk about a gradual decline, but virtually nobody would comply (actually, this is a problem with the ideology as whole (actually, this is a problem with anarchism in general)) and it would take too long. and how many people are actually capable of surviving in the wilderness anymore?

Thinking about it, there is a reason quite a few white supremacists are embracing primitivism….

[Existential Cats]

If you entered anarcho-primitivism, you would have to allow billions to die of hunger and disease.

I mean, for a lot of anprims, that's precisely the point.

how many people are actually capable of surviving in the wilderness anymore?

This seems to me to be more of an indictment of modern civilization than primitivism. I've met so many people who don't even know how to cook and moan if they have to walk more than a mile... People are much less knowledgeable of basic life skills these days with how interconnected and comparatively devoid of struggle modernity is. Primitivism just takes it way too far in the opposite direction and proposes to make everything nasty and brutish.

[Afrikan Staat]

More like a bad ideal. I for one don't want to live in an "ideal Islamic society", similarly with an anarchic society.

I think the anarchy that anarchists actually envision is quite clearly a good society, just impossible; a free society where nobody imposes their will on anyone else and yet all goes ahead naturally with liberty for all and little crime or violence. You can call it naive, you can call it impossible; but actively negative in its outlook? Far from it.

Well for one there will necessarily be significantly less wealth creation, if not near zero, and the result is extreme poverty. I don't like to live in extreme poverty.

[The Human Confederation]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

Humanity is really stupid some times. But that doesn't mean we should give up. Because if we can put our minds to it we can be smart. Look at this thread. People are having their ideas challenged. With this people grow smarter.

Humanity can be really stupid or smart.

But what's your ideal future look like? We seem to be headed for the "experience machine", &, honestly, I'd rather face extinction.

[Adamede]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

If you entered anarcho-primitivism, you would have to allow billions to die of hunger and disease. Because of that, many anprims talk about a gradual decline, but virtually nobody would comply (actually, this is a problem with the ideology as whole (actually, this is a problem with anarchism in general)) and it would take too long. and how many people are actually capable of surviving in the wilderness anymore?

I take it you've not met many an-prims.

[The Angeles Republic]

Maybe Ted Kaczynski had a point.

[Concejos Unidos]

I think the anarchy that anarchists actually envision is quite clearly a good society, just impossible; a free society where nobody imposes their will on anyone else and yet all goes ahead naturally with liberty for all and little crime or violence. You can call it naive, you can call it impossible; but actively negative in its outlook? Far from it.

Well for one there will necessarily be significantly less wealth creation, if not near zero.

Elaborate

[New Zoigai]

I think I belong to the faction believing that anarchy goes against human nature. Whatever group people might form, some kind of hierarchy will shape up sooner or later. If you institutionalize it, you made your first step away from anarchy. If you don't, you still have hierarchies, but more susceptible to arbitrariness. By the way, the bigger a group gets, the more people will actually prefer to be ruled rather than rule themselves. That's not to say they shouldn't have a say, but many can totally live with giving some general consent to the decisions of others every once in a while. So I voted for "anarchy is cringe".

'm not one to defend anarchists but the "human nature" argument kinda sucks? it implies a static and unchanging human nature but that's very obviously not true

Name one political entity that doesnt have a hierarchy right now.

Although somethings about humanity change, there are somethings that more or less stay the same.

If you entered anarcho-primitivism, you would have to allow billions to die of hunger and disease. Because of that, many anprims talk about a gradual decline, but virtually nobody would comply (actually, this is a problem with the ideology as whole (actually, this is a problem with anarchism in general)) and it would take too long. and how many people are actually capable of surviving in the wilderness anymore?

I take it you've not met many an-prims.

What is an "An-Prim" and why does such a concept exist.

it would quite literally be a concept for a Zombie Apocplypse or the Rapture.

[Pangurstan]

Anarcho-primitivism is the only form of anarchism that could actually work, and there are many obvious reasons why it's a bad idea.

[Adamede]

Maybe Ted Kaczynski had a point.

You really can ship anything by mail?

[Kubra]

The problem is: how to prevent anyone from establishing power once it's gone. What will stop someone from forming a gang and becoming essentially fallout-style raiders? The only thing that can prevent it is - power, thus defeating the process. Anarchism is a fallacy.

what keeps unitary republics from overrunning federal republics

[Comemierdas]

I like the idea of anarcho-primitivism. Sometimes I really do wish the agricultural revolution never happened & history never started

Humanity is really stupid some times. But that doesn't mean we should give up. Because if we can put our minds to it we can be smart. Look at this thread. People are having their ideas challenged. With this people grow smarter.

Humanity can be really stupid or smart.

The real problem is that it is mostly both at exactly the same time.

[Concejos Unidos]

Name one political entity that doesnt have a hierarchy right now.

Although somethings about humanity change, there are somethings that more or less stay the same.

1700s NSG: Name one political entity that does not limit suffrage right now.

I guess universal suffrage is antithetical to human nature then, right?

[Page]

'm not one to defend anarchists but the "human nature" argument kinda sucks? it implies a static and unchanging human nature but that's very obviously not true

Name one political entity that doesnt have a hierarchy right now.

Although somethings about humanity change, there are somethings that more or less stay the same.

I take it you've not met many an-prims.

What is an "An-Prim" and why does such a concept exist.

it would quite literally be a concept for a Zombie Apocplypse or the Rapture.

Anarchism does not preclude all hierarchies. Certain hierarchies are natural, such as the parent-child relationship. The child being unable to properly care for themselves cannot be allotted full autonomy. However, this is a dynamic hierarchy, it changes as the child grows up and often flips completely when the parents need to be cared for in old age.

An anarchist society consists too of non-vertical hierarchies. In matters of medicine, the community defers to the wisdom and experience of the doctor, but the doctor in turn would not be in charge of the building and maintenance of trains. There is authority, but authority relates to expertise, there is nobody wielding power outside of their expertise.

It is non-dynamic, vertical hierarchies that are incompatible with anarchism. What anarchism allows for is voluntary adherence to worthy authority and the ability to withdraw from that relationship at will, as opposed to the status quo in which warlords and their enforcer gangs assert ownership of you from the moment of your birth.

[PhilTech]

Anarchism does not preclude all hierarchies. Certain hierarchies are natural, such as the parent-child relationship. The child being unable to properly care for themselves cannot be allotted full autonomy. However, this is a dynamic hierarchy, it changes as the child grows up and often flips completely when the parents need to be cared for in old age.

Emphasis mine. Mother nature by design is hierarchal. Might be over-the-top here, but in an event of a major catastrophe, it is possible that true Anarchy will be achieved in a short timescale. However, overtime, surviving groups will eventually thrive and a hierarchal society is naturally inevitable.

An anarchist society consists too of non-vertical hierarchies. In matters of medicine, the community defers to the wisdom and experience of the doctor, but the doctor in turn would not be in charge of the building and maintenance of trains. There is authority, but authority relates to expertise, there is nobody wielding power outside of their expertise.

It is non-dynamic, vertical hierarchies that are incompatible with anarchism. What anarchism allows for is voluntary adherence to worthy authority and the ability to withdraw from that relationship at will, as opposed to the status quo in which warlords and their enforcer gangs assert ownership of you from the moment of your birth.

So what I am getting at here is that an Anarchist society (by today's definition) is another word for tribalism? Am I getting this right?

[Comemierdas]

Name one political entity that doesnt have a hierarchy right now.

Although somethings about humanity change, there are somethings that more or less stay the same.


What is an "An-Prim" and why does such a concept exist.

it would quite literally be a concept for a Zombie Apocplypse or the Rapture.

Anarchism does not preclude all hierarchies. Certain hierarchies are natural, such as the parent-child relationship. The child being unable to properly care for themselves cannot be allotted full autonomy. However, this is a dynamic hierarchy, it changes as the child grows up and often flips completely when the parents need to be cared for in old age.

An anarchist society consists too of non-vertical hierarchies. In matters of medicine, the community defers to the wisdom and experience of the doctor, but the doctor in turn would not be in charge of the building and maintenance of trains. There is authority, but authority relates to expertise, there is nobody wielding power outside of their expertise.

It is non-dynamic, vertical hierarchies that are incompatible with anarchism. What anarchism allows for is voluntary adherence to worthy authority and the ability to withdraw from that relationship at will, as opposed to the status quo in which warlords and their enforcer gangs assert ownership of you from the moment of your birth.

A saddening characteristic of power is that it can't simply be taken away once established, e.g. by merely withdrawing consent to it. You'd have the same problem almost every left wing ideology has: in order for your anarchism to work you need overly virtuous people who are willing to give up power any time. They'd also have to be capable of continuously finding new ways of organising cooperation. If you don't have super-human beings like that, you need a state that institutionalises these virtues, i.e. order and hierarchies. And that, again, wouldn't be an anarchy.

[Comemierdas]

Anarchism does not preclude all hierarchies. Certain hierarchies are natural, such as the parent-child relationship. The child being unable to properly care for themselves cannot be allotted full autonomy. However, this is a dynamic hierarchy, it changes as the child grows up and often flips completely when the parents need to be cared for in old age.

Emphasis mine. Mother nature by design is hierarchal. Might be over-the-top here, but in an event of a major catastrophe, it is possible that true Anarchy will be achieved in a short timescale. However, overtime, surviving groups will eventually thrive and a hierarchal society is naturally inevitable.

An anarchist society consists too of non-vertical hierarchies. In matters of medicine, the community defers to the wisdom and experience of the doctor, but the doctor in turn would not be in charge of the building and maintenance of trains. There is authority, but authority relates to expertise, there is nobody wielding power outside of their expertise.

It is non-dynamic, vertical hierarchies that are incompatible with anarchism. What anarchism allows for is voluntary adherence to worthy authority and the ability to withdraw from that relationship at will, as opposed to the status quo in which warlords and their enforcer gangs assert ownership of you from the moment of your birth.

So what I am getting at here is that an Anarchist society (by today's definition) is another word for tribalism? Am I getting this right?

Some tribes have quite steep, non-dynamic hierarchies.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

I take it you've not met many an-prims.

What is an "An-Prim" and why does such a concept exist.

it would quite literally be a concept for a Zombie Apocplypse or the Rapture.

Anarcho-Primitivism (people use “Anprim” because “Anarcho-Primitivism” is annoying to type) is an ideology that combines anarchist thought with the belief that the industrial revolution or even the agricultural revolution was a mistake (for a number of reasons). Many Anarcho-Primitivists believe that prior to the agricultural revolution, tribes lived in a much more egalitarian and peaceful society.

The most glaring issues are that:
A) This would require the deaths of billions; Everyone from people with poor eyesight to people who need treatment for their medical problems would be far worse off and would probably die pretty quickly in such a society. This isn’t even mentioning the fact that the Earth cannot sustain 8 billion hunter-gatherers.
B) There isn’t much evidence that hunter-gatherer lifestyles were peaceful or easy. Even if they were, they aren’t the utopia that anprims imagine.
C) Nobody would willingly enter this program, and nobody would stay in it for long. All it would take is a few groups starting farming and settling again and it would be pretty much over. Nobody except anprims want to live in a permanent hunter-gatherer society, and even they would probably be shaken a bit after their friends and relatives start dying of dysentery, starvation, and pretty much every other ailment.

There are many other issues (eg. nuclear waste monitoring), but those are the biggest ones I can think of.

[PhilTech]

Some tribes have quite steep, non-dynamic hierarchies.

That is still the definition of modern anarchy for me - when society is totally separated by tribes and small groups each of which has their own agenda to settle. Anarchy is the complete abolition of a collective force/authority that keeps millions of people in unison.