I am an anarchist. I will answer non-meme, non-smug questions.
>>70073264
Is there such a thing as a good kind of government?
How does an anarchist society provide for common services? Schools, roads, bridges, etc that are beyond the scope of individuals or smaller communities?
Without government, how do you prevent a group from seizing power and forming a new government?
>>70073264
What are some of the best books you could recommend that are for/against your position?
>>70073447
>Is there such a thing as a good kind of government?
If by government, you mean the state, then no. If, however, you meant something more loosely defined, then I suppose you could say self-government.
>How does an anarchist society provide for common services? Schools, roads, bridges, etc that are beyond the scope of individuals or smaller communities?
Unsurprisingly, these things require cooperation among communities. I cannot state authoritatively how these things would manifest (as it is ultimately up to the people living in such a society), although prevalent in anarchist theory is the concept of free association and federations of sorts in which delegates from each community can come together and reach consensus. As opposed to a state, their function would not be to enforce decisions, but rather to return to their respective communities who would then decide among themselves. This is a simple response but you should get the gist.
>Without government, how do you prevent a group from seizing power and forming a new government?
An anarchist society is neither unorganized nor pacifist in nature. Anarchists have and would have to defend themselves like any other community. For a modern example, the Syrian Kurds in Rojava operate under Democratic Confederalism, an off-shoot of sorts of the libertarian socialist philosopher Murray Bookchin's theory developed by Abdullah Öcalan.
>>70073898
The Conquest of Bread is a classic anarchist text, and is short and accessible. For something more modern, Anarchy Works by Peter Gelderloos. Additionally, An Anarchist FAQ is useful for answering specific questions, but it can be a bit dense at times.
What kind of anarchist are you?
>>70076582
Anarchist communist, I guess.
Wouldn't governments naturally form from communities? I don't get anarchism.
>>70073264
Why, in the absence in governance, should I not be allowed to establish a tribal system similar to that of pre-Roman Germanic Europe? Why is it always multi-culti hippie bullshit at the forefront of these discussions?
Doesnt all anarchism usually end up as communist beliefs
>>70073264
Are you aware that your ideology is an oxymoron? If there was no state to coerce people, people wouldn't give up private property. And leaders naturally emerge, so you can't keep people from having leaders except by force, and if you do that, you're applying coercion, which is what anarchism is about in theory. It's self contradicting.
>>70077358
I mean against, not about.
>>70076742
Do you advocate the forceful appropriation of capital from its owners, or are you a peaceful ancom?
What is the Anarcho-communist solution for dealing with:
>individual criminals, petty and major crimes
>large gangs of criminals (biker gangs etc)
>organized crime/mob/mafia
>communities that go slightly too far and accidentally a sovereign state
>scarcity in supplies, where there is simply not enough of certain materials for all to have their fill
>>70078054
>anarcho-[retard]
>solution
They're braindead utopians. Never deal with anyone who doesn't value pragmatism because they don't value - or understand - how things actually fucking work, because they are so deattached from reality. No different than Communists and hardcore Libertarians.
Anarchy and Communism are mutually exclusive. The free market is the best tool for removing the state.
>>70073264
So what is culture? I imagine an Anarchist doesn't believe in it because it inherently creates a group and groups are oppressive.
>>70077166
Because that would be fucking stupid. I'm not saying you aren't allowed to, just that no one is going to join you.
>>70077326
Basically. Many anarchists are communists, and both are part of the broader socialist movement.
>>70077358
>Are you aware that your ideology is an oxymoron?
It isn't but okay.
>people wouldn't give up private property.
This is a common misconception about anarchism, and the left in general. We differentiate between personal possessions and private property. By private property, we are referring specifically to the means of production, and historically, maintaining private control of the means of production has required force, mostly by the state.
>And leaders naturally emerge
This is just naive appeal to human nature. Obviously an anarchist society presupposes a majority population willing to participate in it. Just like any other decent society, really.
>you're applying coercion
Anarchists are not opposed to force, we are opposed to hierarchy.
>>70077713
I think forceful appropriation is unfortunate but likely necessary to some degree. I am not a violent person, though, so personally I'd prefer to avoid violence.
How does it feel to know that your political beliefs come from your experience of neglect as a child?
>>70078445
i tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but you know what you are talking about.
sage
>>70073264
If you couldn't be an anarchist what would be your second best ideology to live in?
>>70078445
So what is your point of view on this election as an anarchist
>>70078445
>we are opposed to hierarchy.
But isn't opposing something creating a hierarchy? You're putting something beneath yourself.
>>70078054
>individual criminals, petty and major crimes
Generally we advocate for things like restorative justice.
>large gangs of criminals (biker gangs etc)
I'm not sure why it's difficult to understand that anarchists have no problem defending themselves and their communities, forcefully if necessary.
>organized crime/mob/mafia
Exists largely due to and is fueled by capitalism.
>communities that go slightly too far and accidentally a sovereign state
This is largely circumstantial.
>scarcity in supplies, where there is simply not enough of certain materials for all to have their fill
Collective management. Certainly couldn't do any worse than capitalism is with regard to scarcity and over-consumption.
>>70078406
The so-called free market has, since its inception, relied on the force of the state to defend it.
>>70078432
We are opposed to harmful culture, yes. But I've never met any anarchists who think culture in itself is a bad thing. Except maybe the Stirnerites.
>>70078445
>By private property, we are referring specifically to the means of production, and historically, maintaining private control of the means of production has required force, mostly by the state.
Does private property include materials that could create means of production? It's the year 2101 and anarchist society has emerged. Let' say 3D printers are advanced enough to create pieces to create the means of production. If a person purchases each pieces and builds himself a Widget Machine 3000, is it still his personal property? What if he uses this Widget Machine 3000 to sell widgets for profit. Is it now considered private property?
>>70078950
>But I've never met any anarchists who think culture in itself is a bad thing.
So how do anarchists define culture? Obviously a homogeneous culture does not fit into anarchist ideology and we all know anarchists do not believe in borders.
>>70078686
Nice rebuttal.
>>70078720
I benefit greatly from the status quo and if a better world were not possible I guess I'd just deal with the mediocrity of this one.
>>70078894
Bernie Sanders is likely the least harmful of the candidates in the two major parties, though I'm not a fan of his at all. Hillary is perhaps the worst of them all, Trump not far behind.
>>70078922
The force required to dismantle hierarchy is not in itself hierarchical, so long as it only goes so far as is necessary.
>>70078445
>Anarchists are not opposed to force, we are opposed to hierarchy.
I don't understand how a hierarchy doesn't appear. Some people are better at certain things than others. These people will be in positions of power. What's the difference with electing officials today and electing officials/managers/whatever in anarchist society in relation to the concept of hierarchy?
>>70078445
> We differentiate between personal possessions and private property.
I'm talking precisely about property of the means of production. If you or your father or grandparents busted their your asses off to get a business (a burger joint, for example), and you pay money to someone in exchange for working your property, how're you "appropriating his money"? Moreover, if it took you or your family years of work and study, why should you make a kid who barely got out of school an owner of your business? Because that's what communism stands for, being against the employer-employee hierarchy and in favor of every worker owning their workplace.
>Obviously an anarchist society presupposes a majority population willing to participate in it.
What about those who don't want to? Suppose lots of collectively operated farms and factories are established. Now suppose a guy decides to set up his own business, and another guy decides to be employed by the former, because he will have a better wage that way than in the cooperative. You can't say there's coercion in that, because if cooperatives were so great, he'd just stay there instead of accepting to be employed by the guy who wants to set up his own business.
>Anarchists are not opposed to force, we are opposed to hierarchy.
It's a hierarchy, those who use force are above others, because, redundantly, they have the monopoly on force.
>>70076742
>ywn be this retarded
feels good man
>>70078445
>maintaining private control of the means of production has required force, mostly by the state.
how are you going to take away private control without force?
>implying everyone wants to be part of hippy communes where idiots have as much say in how a company is run as the managerial class
>>70079227
>The force required to dismantle hierarchy is not in itself hierarchical, so long as it only goes so far as is necessary.
But are ideas not scaled in a relative hierarchy?
You are saying your idea is better than other ideas which is creating a hierarchy of ideas.
>>70079241
>Some people are better at certain things than others. These people will be in positions of power
And this was how the first tribe was formed.
>>70079064
I've never heard an anarchist discuss culture differently than anyone else would. There are a number of discussions on which parts of culture in various parts of the world are harmful and which aren't, but it's honestly a little boring.
>>70079241
Why assume that this hierarchy suddenly exists? Like any other society, an anarchist one presupposes a majority population willing to participate in it. Whether or not you think this is possible is another question altogether.
>>70079314
>I'm talking precisely about property of the means of production. If you or your father or grandparents busted their your asses off to get a business (a burger joint, for example), and you pay money to someone in exchange for working your property, how're you "appropriating his money"? Moreover, if it took you or your family years of work and study, why should you make a kid who barely got out of school an owner of your business? Because that's what communism stands for, being against the employer-employee hierarchy and in favor of every worker owning their workplace.
This is not how modern capitalism functions in the vast majority of cases.
>It's a hierarchy, those who use force are above others, because, redundantly, they have the monopoly on force.
An act of defense against an opposing force is not hierarchy.
>>70074724
>Their function would not be to enforce decisions, but rather to return to their respective communities who would then decide among themselves.
How will they decide within those communities? A democratic vote? Isn't that essentially government? You may say that these communities aren't a state but don't those communities essentially fulfill the basic definition of a state? They consist of a permanent population withing a territory and agreed to be organized in a government?
>>70073264
how do you transition into anarchy from stateism, without any outer or inner powers interfering? How could you defend your new "state"? The military would surely not side with you, they want a state.
They would kick your asses and bring back the statist system.
>>70079436
>how are you going to take away private control without force?
I am not opposed to force. My point is that capitalism has relied on the state to function, and would not be able to do so without it.
>>70079481
Sorry, I should clarify. By hierarchy I largely just mean social hierarchy. These abstract notions of what constitutes hierarchy are largely irrelevant.
Sorry bro, i'm not up to wishful thinking and fairy tales right now.
>>70079643
>I've never heard an anarchist discuss culture differently than anyone else would. There are a number of discussions on which parts of culture in various parts of the world are harmful and which aren't, but it's honestly a little boring.
I'm talking about the idea of culture itself not it's unique aspects. If people exist within a culture they have taken aspects of existence and applied them in a way which scales in importance, creating a hierarchy of interest for the group.
Therefore the nature of culture is inherently not an anarchist idea. You would have to destroy culture before building an anarchist community.
>>70079643
You don't hierarchy, but some people really are much better than most other people.
>>70079768
>These abstract notions of what constitutes hierarchy are largely irrelevant.
I strongly disagree. Ideas exist in the abstract and are the sapling of the greater tree. When you get to the root you learn how the tree grows and why it grows the way it did.
>>70073264
also, shouldn't you be sleeping already?
you're gonna feel tired when your mom wakes you up. 8th grade math is hard, man, don't be a slacker.
>>70079708
>How will they decide within those communities? A democratic vote? Isn't that essentially government?
Anarchists generally advocate consensus decision making. Other libertarian socialists (and probably some anarchists) are fine with democratic votes. The difference between such a scenario and a state (in the sense that we use it) is that in the former decisions are made from the bottom and built upwards, whereas a state makes decisions from above which are then imposed downward.
>>70079929
>some people really are much better than most other people.
I think it stems more into the nature of the human mind which is constantly searching for answers, stability, and meaning. We inherently create a structured way of life in order to ground ourselves.
>>70078950
>justice
who enforces this justice? Are there still courts, lawyers, etc? Because that sounds pretty statist to me.
>defending their community
In any organization there's always a hierarchy. In the Wild West when the Indians attack, the Marshal leads the posse to fight them. Do you guys vote on which biker gang member to shoot next? Seriously though what makes this community any different from a Wild West town?
I'll give you the mob thing, but the idea that government will never form in any of your anarchist communes when they are all practically one step away from being a state themselves (with a legal system, organized defense force, monopoly of force held by the community, command economy, etc.), or is circumstantial is ludicrous.
>collective management
Because everyone will just automatically give up limited resources, and give them up in a completely fair manner. At least our current government has laws that protect private property from being stolen, but now "redistribution" is the expected outcome.
>>70079757
>how do you transition into anarchy from stateism, without any outer or inner powers interfering?
You don't, which is why (in part) the radical left is revolutionary rather than relying on reform within the current system. Am I saying a bunch of average people should get together and attempt to fight a modern military? Fuck no, but there are forms of resistance (and you see these in the form of protests and whatnot even today) that are useful and necessary.
>>70080145
No man, some people are just born more intelligent than other people. Intelligence is very much heritable, from 50 - 80%. There really are people who are born charismatic, witty, and intelligent leaders who we would all benefit if they were in charge of some shit.
>>70079768
>I'm not opposed to force
>expropriating people's private property
>GIBS ME DAT!
>breaking the NAP
Thanks for deconstructing Anarchism! :D
>>70079643
>This is not how modern capitalism functions in the vast majority of cases.
How does it function according to you, then?
>An act of defense against an opposing force is not hierarchy.
Yeah... I'm sure the Spanish Anarchists' councils and militias didn't constitute a hierarchy, with such institutions deciding over the rest of the people. There was democracy... Unless you wanted to exercise private initiative, or unless you were perceived as a rightist, or unless you were a Catholic, in that case, fuck democracy, amirite?
It's a semantics thing, there was a state, there was coercion, they just didn't call it like that.
>>70073264
Are you the edgeyist kid in high school?
Calling it a night in about 15 minutes. I apologize if any of my answers have not been satisfactory. I am not very eloquent, and I am glad that a number of you have been discussing this genuinely rather than meming at me.
>>70079970
>consensus decision making
literally vague as fuck.
>Other(s)are fine with democratic votes
And this is what it WOULD IN FACT be. But then you've established a hierarchy - majority/minority. Majority rulz!!!! >:DD
THANK YOU FOR DECONSTRUCTING ANARCHY
>>70079970
What is the difference with consensus decision making and a democratic vote?
Was Occupy Wall Street an example of consensus decision making?
Consensus (Direct Democracy @ Occupy Wall Street)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dtD8RnGaRQ
>>70079970
>Other libertarian socialists (and probably some anarchists) are fine with democratic votes.
Which is what I really do not understand in regards to Anarchism. Democracy inherently creates hierarchy and oppression due to majority vs minority politics.
You would have to be in a continual state of revolution to ensure otherwise and that's not practical nor beneficial.
>>70080562
>Was Occupy Wall Street an example of consensus decision making?
christ that was a fucking mess. i remember going to that and it taking 2 hours just to decide where people should setup food tables.
>>70073264
When are you going to move to Somalia?
SOMALIA
O
M
A
L
I
A
>>70080819
Not to derail but are Australians drunk all the time?
>>70080552
>literally vague as fuck.
Consensus decision-making is actually a pretty organized model for making decisions. The Wikipedia article is decent. Part of the vagueness is just me being a bad writer, and some of it comes from the ideas being a bit abstract.
>But then you've established a hierarchy - majority/minority.
Hence consensus decision-making. I personally am opposed to direct democracy for that very reason, I was just stating that there are many who are not.
>>70080562
See the Wikipedia article. Here's a flow-chart of the process in a very basic form that I found there. The primary difference is that while people may disagree, consensus can be built regardless by coming to a point where those who disagree are willing to consent despite their reservations.
>>70080562
>Was Occupy Wall Street an example of consensus decision making?
Occupy Wall Street was a clusterfuck, but I don't have time to get into that now.
>>70080819
didnt they figure out, the average Somali standard of living was improved under Anarchi - like, srs?
>>70081164
How do you feel about a minimalist government?
>>70081393
A minimalist government that operated under libertarian socialist principles would probably be alright.
>>70081164
Standing aside is something humans aren't very good at.
>>70073264
I used to be an anarchist like you OP.
Riddle me this, say you have your anarchist society, with a functioning government sans state, everyone is happy and the market provides all the services and goods everyone needs.
Now, bad dictator guy Chad comes along with a massive army, comprised of a professional military, with advanced firearms, tanks, artillery, air force, etc.
He has no reason to threaten you of course, because your society is a peaceful and cooperative one. However, he demands tribute in exchange for being left in peace. Weeks later, you are tipped off that spies loyal to Chad have infiltrated your society and are analyzing your weaknesses and vulnerabilities.
How do you respond?
>>70081537
What do you mean by libertarian "socialist"?
>>70081228
>Occupy Wall Street was a clusterfuck
Did they even have a leader? It's a perfect example how consensus decision-making just doesn't work, they all had a similar goal and nothing got done or planned properly.
>>70081756
I hate redirecting people rather than answering directly, but the Wikipedia article on libertarian socialism is actually great.
Sending from phone to say that I am heading out now.
>>70081756
It's "intellectual" speak for "check out this theory but let's not do anything about it ever!"
>>70081164
That model only works in VERY SMALL GROUPS. The larger the groups the more difficult it is to come to a consensus.
Look at the World Trade Organization. Only a 150 some states within it. And their ambassadors take literally years to come to consensus.
It's not practical on a society scale. Hence why there is democracy.
"anarchist communist" is nonsensical. Any form of communism, socialism, or democracy requires coercion to force people to conform to the plans whether they be made by the mob or the politburo.
True anarchism is far more radical-- everyone owns themselves and can do what they please as long as they do not initiate force against others.
