Is Anarchism Good?

[Kernovia]

This thread is to discuss anarchism and if it is a good idea or not. Now anarchism is a very broad term but its core idea is a very limited government or even a dissolved government where people almost always volunteer. Now again its very broad, you may disagree with this assertment but that is the basics.

Anyways what do you think?

[Bloodblaze]

Humans will be humans. I find it to be impossible to achieve in its desired form.

That is to say, not really.

[Astulla]

I think that while anarchy (not the "ideal" kind, more like the mad max kind) can be achieved for a short period of time, during a crisis, someone will inevitably take advantage of the power vacuum and a more orderly society would return. Anarchy can't be a constant, only a transitional period. (In my belief, at least)

[Setubalde]

No. Organization and the perpetuation of authority is what got humanity to the advanced state it is in today.

We're not abolishing that.

[Sir Fluff]

There will always be some kind of group/organization that controls things. I think it's impossible and usually pretty dystopian.

[Lugarvatn]

It depends on the variants of anarchy

[Setubalde]

It depends on the variants of anarchy

Anarchy is anarchy.

There are no "variants" in my mind. Just an attempt at statelessness.

[Fjolmidlum]

Statelessness is unattainable without a universally enlightened population. Unfortunately, that will probably never happen.

[Zetronius]

Statelessness is unattainable without a universally enlightened population. Unfortunately, that will probably never happen.

As an Anarchist myself, we don't want a stateless nation, but a nation without rulers.

[Kostane]

Statelessness is unattainable without a universally enlightened population. Unfortunately, that will probably never happen.

As an Anarchist myself, we don't want a stateless nation, but a nation without rulers.

What does that look like materially?

[Hexatanople]

In a just society, laws exist for a reason. Usually to stop people from getting killed and robbed and injured. These laws are there for a reason, and as long as they’re fair and impartial, they should continue to exist. That is to say, no, a complete breakdown of all laws would be chaotic and bloody, and anarchy isn’t that great.

[German Spartacist Socialist Republics]

This thread is to discuss anarchism and if it is a good idea or not. Now anarchism is a very broad term but its core idea is a very limited government or even a dissolved government where people almost always volunteer. Now again its very broad, you may disagree with this assertment but that is the basics.

Anyways what do you think?

So, to begin, anarchism has been tried in the past (Makhnovschina in Ukraine, Catalonia in the Spanish Civil War). There are a few contemporary examples, I think most notable would be the EZLN in Mexico. I wouldn’t call myself a complete anarchist, since I still believe that a somewhat organised state is necessary to protect borders (unless the whole world went anarchist, which isn’t too likely).

I think that the state is inherently bad, but it is a sort of necessary evil, and it can (and should) be restricted. I also believe that states should be less centralised (more confederal), and allow for any ethnic groups within their borders to choose to be independent. I also believe that any anarchist society should be socialist, as workers should control the means of production and reap the fruits of their labour. This would mean more economic democracy. Speaking of democracy, it should be more direct, so as to not allow for a class of elected representatives to exploit the system.

[Fjolmidlum]

Statelessness is unattainable without a universally enlightened population. Unfortunately, that will probably never happen.

As an Anarchist myself, we don't want a stateless nation, but a nation without rulers.

And what is the meaningful distinction there between statelessness and an utterly neutered state?

[Terruana]

yeah society without government would face a lot of issues

[Zetronius]

As an Anarchist myself, we don't want a stateless nation, but a nation without rulers.

What does that look like materially?

Like there's no pyramid hierarchy of society, with people at the top and people at the bottom. Instead, society is a circle. Every person is equal, has equal opportunities in life, and has an equal opportunity to gain wealth through their own respective talents. the state is run purely by 100% transparency voting systems, where each and every person above 18 can participate in.

[Kostane]

What does that look like materially?

Like there's no pyramid hierarchy of society, with people at the top and people at the bottom. Instead, society is a circle. Every person is equal, has equal opportunities in life, and has an equal opportunity to gain wealth through their own respective talents. the state is run purely by 100% transparency voting systems, where each and every person above 18 can participate in.

Who runs these voting systems?

[Lugarvatn]

Statelessness is unattainable without a universally enlightened population. Unfortunately, that will probably never happen.

As an Anarchist myself, we don't want a stateless nation, but a nation without rulers.

Basically no rulers, not no rules, right?

[Zetronius]

Like there's no pyramid hierarchy of society, with people at the top and people at the bottom. Instead, society is a circle. Every person is equal, has equal opportunities in life, and has an equal opportunity to gain wealth through their own respective talents. the state is run purely by 100% transparency voting systems, where each and every person above 18 can participate in.

Who runs these voting systems?

the people. Specifically people who have the ability to fairly run elections.

As an Anarchist myself, we don't want a stateless nation, but a nation without rulers.

Basically no rulers, not no rules, right?

that's about right.

[Sir Fluff]

Who runs these voting systems?

the people. Specifically people who have the ability to fairly run elections.

Basically no rulers, not no rules, right?

that's about right.

So some people will still have more control than other, leading to a hierarchy.

[Hexatanople]

Who runs these voting systems?

the people. Specifically people who have the ability to fairly run elections.

Just to clarify, there is a person who runs elections? Because if so, it sounds like you’re describing a leader.

[Astulla]

Who runs these voting systems?

the people. Specifically people who have the ability to fairly run elections.

This is the problem with anarchy. People are naturally selfish and evil unless made to be otherwise. Unless you plan on having an army of Jesus's running your government, the experiment would be doomed from the start.

[Kostane]

Who runs these voting systems?

the people. Specifically people who have the ability to fairly run elections.

Who determines which people have the ability to fairly run elections?

[Zetronius]

the people. Specifically people who have the ability to fairly run elections.

that's about right.

So some people will still have more control than other, leading to a hierarchy.

in theory yes but we can counter this by making unstoppable hierarchic control illegal

[Slembana]

Absofuckinglutely! Anarchism is awesome. I myself am an anarchist as I am opposed to the state and and to unjust hierarchy. I wish for a fully anarchist world.

[Hexatanople]

So some people will still have more control than other, leading to a hierarchy.

in theory yes but we can counter this by making unstoppable hierarchic control illegal

So is there a hierarchy or not? Because you said everyone was equal, and now you’re saying there’s theoretically a hierarchy.