You must log in or register to comment.
How does anarchy not devolve into “might makes right” when bad actors are in limitless supply?
Vigilance and not naively thinking someone else can handle your social responsibilities for you.
Bad actors are also a minority of a minority of people. The world doesn’t turn to MadMax just because there’s no one with a gun threatening your life if you don’t do what they want of you.
The problems are the smart ones, weaseling their way into power, dividing and spreading hate, doing anything for power, even if it takes decades when ordinary people just want to work and live a normal life.
I also think this is the biggest, and maybe only, problem to be solved before we can have a good society.
A test for empathy for any managerial post is potentially one way to do it, but as usual, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
How do you run centralised production without some form of central oversight? How do you decide which commune gets the power plant or local food distribution hub.
You don’t have centralised production or centralised oversight, you have distributed systems and mutual aid.
How do you decide? Some far away central body knows best for the needs of the local people despite never being there? Are those deemed less important to suffer because statistics dictate someone else gets the goods.
Can all production be practically done in a distributed manner?
Plenty of industry works best at scale-- you’re not going to build neighbourhood-scale high-performance steel mills or semiconductor fabs.
Centralised production is the only option in some forms of production, is every town going to have it’s own steel mill or power plant?
See the mutual aid part? That means peoples can work together for larger scale needs.
People are capable of voluntarily working together to create complex things without being ordered at gunpoint.
Yes sure, but there will be centralised production and because of that implicitly a form of centralised power.
Not how it works buddy.
Can’t have power if everyone leaves a worksite due to some wannabe despot. Being distributed allows flexibility and choice.
And when there is no state apparatus to force people to be beholden to power, there is no power to stop them.
Doesn’t have to be one person, it can be the majority workers in a centralised production system deciding to stop exporting something to a certain region because they don’t like them for whatever reason.
If a group of anarchists don’t want to associate with others, that’s their choice.
Anarchism is what the world had before we started forming governments. If anarchism is a good and viable means of self-governing, why is it not adopted in countries across the globe? Why is there so much history of structured society overcoming anarchy? Where are all the utopian anarchist societies today?
Where are all the utopian anarchist societies today?
Destroyed by people that like hoarding power, be it capitalist or self-proclaimed “communist”.
What you’re calling “overcoming” is actually “backstabbing” once anarchists are no longer needed.
But it’ll work this time, right?
Sure, we just need to guillotine all the people who refuse to give up their authority
Frequently asked questions about anarchism:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq-full
Why should power and food distribution be restricted to only one commune in the first place?
My point is you will end up in situations where one town or city might a nuclear reactor which powers the whole region. So then you end up with inbalances of power between locally controlled production.
A nuclear power plant would need consumers as much as it needs engineers. Any place that builds it would be dependent on other communes to balance the load.
Why would it need consumers? It can function fine without unless you are describing a capitalist economy. No need to balance the load either one nuclear power plant can sustain the region where all the power plant workers live with electricity.
Exactly, and to balance the load you need someone consuming the generated power. Which in case of a nuclear plant needs a lot of people, otherwise you’ve just wasted a ton of resources, time and space on a Stalker cosplay set
No need to balance the load
I don’t think you know anything about how electricity and power grids work. Unless we invent superbatteries that are several orders of magnitude more efficient than current ones, you need to balance the load if you want to actually use the power plant that you built.
Sorry if this is a tangent, but do we really need nuclear? Solar can be extremely decentralized.
We need some baseload electricity production to support renewables doesn’t have to be nuclear, could be storing energy by filling a dammed lake or something along those lines.
You build a community that cares and values each other, a society of trust. I can already hear your thoughts, “oh vey how does anyone get rich off that?”
“Oh vey” is a weird typo, especially in conjunction with calling a Jewish guy a parasite
Whats your point?
If you build a classless organisation of production i think that will drastically reduce tension in society from a lack of class war and allow for development of community, however we shouldn’t be utopian and pretend like no friction between people will exist, it won’t all be all trust and care.
Removed by mod
Engels is shit. Read Kropotkin.
