this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
507 points (87.2% liked)

Asklemmy

44151 readers
1244 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago (5 children)

The vast majority of humans are actually nice, altruistic and not selfish if you treat them with respect. And hence anarchism would not resolve in everyone killing each other.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Problem is you need more than the “vast majority” to be nice before you feel safe.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I disagree. There can still be a communal security service that resolves conflicts and tries to keep public spaces safe. I read an awful lot about shooting in this thread. I guess that might be a United States of American bias on the web, but still, I don't understand how y'all think going aboiyt shooting others would be the first in anyone's minds if they would be free 😅

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Absolutely correct. It would be the people who are in power now, building gangs and robbing the weak.

Anarchism is a schoolyard without teachers. Most kids are ok and will treat each other with respect.

But if you ever were molested in a dark corner of said schoolyard you know how important oversight is.

In an Anarchist world, it would be traumatized/autistic people like me running around with guns and shooting everyone who so much as touches another person on sight.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In an Anarchist world, it would be traumatized/autistic people like me running around with guns and shooting everyone who so much as touches another person on sight.

Genuine question: Why? What circumstances in an "Anarchist world" would cause this behaviour?

Or the other way: If you feel like this, what in our current system stops you from acting out?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

If we had anarchism tomorrow which I‘m not convinced is a bad or good thing, we‘d still have people wanting to overpower others. Its a neurological/trauma issue. Most serial killers have a history of child abuse and so on.

These people will murder you regardless of anarchism, others will rape you, others will touch your kids.

But mire sinister, the ones who speak silver tongue will gather 10 friends and take your 10th as in the old ages.

And yes, if there is nobody keeping them in check, I‘d end them.

I don’t because people do keep them in check (less for the silver tongued, which is why I say eat the rich)

[–] littlebluespark 2 points 1 year ago

The golden thread of 99% of religions is "Don't be a dick", but then religion screws it all up.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What would an anarchistic world even look like? The first thing that would happen if society collapsed is local communities gathering into "tribes" which just expand and develop until we get to where we are. Humans are natural pack animals would gravitate towards a structured community.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's funny how you assume that structured can only happen with violence. You're right, an advanced anarchist society would be a real democracy (not a representative democracy like we have today). It would in fact be way more structured than societies today. If a small group of people can't simply enforce rules on all the others, the bodies that make decisions for the group will have to do a lot more work to make sure they are including everyone in the conversation in order to avoid conflict. It would involve a lot more conversation, deliberation and balancing than our current societies.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Not in my experience.