Message from @Dargon
Discord ID: 354121921274576896
@Anglican It is like a drug, most of the time a person knowns it is bad, but they will refuse to stop doing it because it brings them joy.
@Railing And what do you define as an unjust hierarchie?
all hierarchies predicated on authority with a few exceptions like the parent-child relation
All authority?
yup
Why is that?
well the core idea behind anarchism is that individual should be free to act as they see fit. Authority prevents people from acting as they see fit. Therefore anarchists are against authority.
Authoritarian relations coerce people into acting against their own self-interest and result in humans committing inhuman acts.
"There is no freedom if I can't choose to do wrong"
@Railing Yet, in societies aren't there always people who need to be ordered, and those who are ordered have to carry out their orders?
@Deleted User communities can organize horizontally through grass roots democracy along the lines of solidarity and mutual aid. Of course, there would coercive social constraints in anarchist society, but individuals wouldn't have explicit, institutional authority over others. This means that individuals will still be free to enact justice on criminals, etc.
A good example of an anarchist society is Israeli Kibbutz
*was kibbutz, they recently privatized much of it
So simplified, a mob would rule in a small community and would make their own rules and goals, but this is somehow different from authority?
When you boil it down, it is just an oligarchy in a community.
a mob wouldn't "rule" in any sense of the word. "Rule" implies top-down decision making, which wouldn't exist. People would be free to start their own organizations if the disagree with the prevailing agenda. Furthermore, I would stipulate that all communities organize along anarchist principles so they wouldn't come up with their own rules and regulations.
So what happens when a group get's fed up and starts their own organization that makes rules and regulations?
The point is that an individual would never be subject to any authority, not social relations would be coercive in nature as they are in capitalism
I mean that could happen, but the same could happen in any society
in my view if a group decided it wanted hierarchy in anarchist society, they'd get the wall
It does, they are called rebellions and insurgencies in todays society.
And besides, who enforces the rules, when there are no rules and anybody can do what they want?
From the standpoint of dialectical materialism, I imagine there'd be revolts in an anarcho-communist society
As I said what people want isn't some esoteric concept
There will always be revolts in any society, unless it is made up of mindless drones who do not question anything.
people want community and self-determination.
I mean yes, but regressive social movements are rarely successful
or relevent
I would welcome a revolution in an anarchist thats seeks to further its ideals
post-left anarchism does just that
regressions to fascism, capitalism, Marxist-Leninism aren't likely though
But people **WILL** want organization and leadership.
because people don't like being murdered and dominated
organization and leadership doesn't necessitate authority
But what is a leader who does not give orders?
they can give orders too
but they wouldn't have any coercive authority