Comment on What do you think of anarchism?

• Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Oh boy I love how the Freetown Christiania is first on that list. Since that’s a place I actually know very well.

  You list is bullshit, that’s like saying 5 friends are an anarchist society. Those are NOT self governing societies. They are under the rules of countries.
  If any are not, they are probably just very small cult like communities.

  They do not run factories power-plants, electricity grids, infrastructure or anything of any serious scale, and are in no way models for how to run a country.

  Freetown Christiania had lots of problems with crime, and they also had huge problem of elitism as in very few people actually decided everything, the power structure is/was very much based on who had lived there from the beginning.

  All this anarchy idealism/ideology is bullshit that doesn’t work in real self governing societies. Of course it can work for small groups, like what the fuck, just because I live in a street where we help each other, we don’t form a government and police for that!

  Christiana may have called themselves autonomous, but they never where in any meaningful sense of the word. And the truth is they needed help from criminal rocker gangs to get rid of widespread sales of hard drugs. And later they chose to legalize according to Danish law, and called on help from the real police to get rid of the remaining drug sales. Christiana today a mostly normal part of Copenhagen today, but maybe still influenced more than average by the 70’s flower power roots, although there was never any flower power in the way that society was run.
  Christiania was always 100% depending on the normal society they existed within, the dependence wasn’t superficial either but for EVERYTHING, Jobs, hospitals, doctors, sewage, electricity. Christiania was never much more than a football club deciding to play by their own rules. They can do that, but they still live in a society where everything is governed by the rules of the country and the city.

  I’m sorry, but your dream is an impossible lie. And you just proved your complete inability to demonstrate any self governing society of any significant size that function by a system of anarchy. By significant size, I’d say it needs to be at least 50000 people, to have any significance to show it as a working model at a scale above a tiny tribal community where everybody mostly know each other.

  source

  • communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    “They are usually destroyed by outside forces”

    By significant size, I’d say it needs to be at least 50000 people

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia

    source

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      you’ll have to demonstrate issues with the fundamental ideology that apply to all anarchist societies

      No you have to show it actually works, the idea of anarchy goes back to ancient Greece, and there has never been a functioning society based on it. Because it doesn’t function.

      the autonomous region of Catalonia in northeast Spain was controlled or largely influenced by various anarchist, syndicalist, communist, and socialist trade unions, parties, and militias of the Spanish Civil War era.

      Anarchists enter the government

      So it wasn’t anarchist, it was merely one among many groups, it had a traditional government, and it lasted for only 2 years.

      again you haven’t even begun to research the topic, but are very confident.

      I’ve accumulated experience about the topic over time since the 70’s. I’ve read philosophical books about forms of government, I’ve examined MANY types of governance, and examined why Communism works so poorly, while Social democracies seem to be just about the best form of government we have achieved yet. This is in combination with my interest in national economy, and psychology from an evolutionary perspective.

      Don’t you try to claim I haven’t examined the subject, when national governance is a high interest of mine through about 50 years now.
      And yes based on my experiences it’s extremely clear that anarchy is not a realistically functional form of governance. Anarchy for bigger societies is ONLY something countries devolve to, for instance after a war, and things ONLY get better when a proper government is restored. And by better I mean not killing each other, and not die of starvation, and the economy working and access to hospitals and education. All the things we normally take for granted in developed societies.

      I’ve presented to you the LACK of anarchist societies of scale as an indication it does not work. This means there is no proof it works, and since the idea and principles are clearly not working even in theory in my opinion, the lack of evidence to the contrary mean I see Absolutely no reason to believe it can work.

      You have shown NOTHING to make a plausible argument for anarchy, on the contrary everything I’ve been shown by you and others turn out to be clearly flawed and not support anything that is claimed.

      Again Anarchy as an idea dates back to ancient Greece for fucks sake, and there is NO society of scale in history to my knowledge that has proven it works even partially. It’s very easy to prove me wrong, because if there is, all you have to do is provide a link to said society.

      Many things have been tried for the past 2000 years around the globe, if Anarchy which has been a known theoretical model for all that time actually worked, it should be very widespread by now.

      Every single capitalist country immediately dogpiles and tries to destroy any anarchist movement,

      This is so much bullshit. the modern form of capitalism is only 5-600 years old. EVERY society before that cannot have been oppressed by capitalism.
      Capitalism also isn’t a form of governance, it’s a method to facilitate economic activity. Which is why ALL democracies are capitalist. Capitalism may suck hard, but we have nothing to replace it with yet.
      Anarchy is not an alternative to capitalism, on the contrary. Anarchy as an idea was always about pursuing individual interests. The exact opposite of socialism. To facilitate the pursuance of individual interests, capitalism in a democracy is the best model we know of.

      source

      • communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        No you have to show it actually works, the idea of anarchy goes back to ancient Greece, and there has never been a functioning society based on it. Because it doesn’t function.

        categorically false

        So it wasn’t anarchist, it was merely one among many groups, it had a traditional government, and it lasted for only 2 years

        You’ve already proven you don’t know what anarchism is or how its defined by saying that because it had a government it wasn’t anarchist.

        I’ve read philosophical books about forms of government

        there’s a reason we use primary sources to analyze things, which books of proudhon, kropotkin, or bakunin have you read?

        Communism works so poorly, while Social democracies seem to be just about the best form of government we have achieved yet. This is in combination with my interest in national economy, and psychology from an evolutionary perspective.

        Have you ever considered that maybe people with a lot of resources want these things not to happen, and that’s the primary reason they don’t happen, rather than them being fundamentally flawed?

        And yes based on my experiences it’s extremely clear that anarchy is not a realistically functional form of governance. Anarchy for bigger societies is ONLY something countries devolve to, for instance after a war, and things ONLY get better when a proper government is restored. And by better I mean not killing each other, and not die of starvation, and the economy working and access to hospitals and education. All the things we normally take for granted in developed societies.

        This has nothing in common with any definition of anarchism or any implementation of anarchism by any of the founding philosophers of anarchism, you don’t even know how to define anarchism, those things “devolving into anarchy” has literally nothing to do with anarchist philosophy, and is just a co-opting of the term.

        I’ve presented to you the LACK of anarchist societies of scale as an indication it does not work. This means there is no proof it works, and since the idea and principles are clearly not working even in theory in my opinion, the lack of evidence to the contrary mean I see Absolutely no reason to believe it can work.

        How do you know that the reason it doesn’t work isn’t because there’s very powerful people who want it to not work? All evidence seems to point to that, considering they’re always destroyed by outside forces.

        You have shown NOTHING to make a plausible argument for anarchy, on the contrary everything I’ve been shown by you and others turn out to be clearly flawed and not support anything that is claimed.

        I have, you just are arguing against a strawman, you believe that if there’s a government, it isn’t anarchy, because you don’t know what anarchists actually believe.

        Again Anarchy as an idea dates back to ancient Greece for fucks sake, and there is NO society of scale in history to my knowledge that has proven it works even partially. It’s very easy to prove me wrong, because if there is, all you have to do is provide a link to said society.

        en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia

        Many things have been tried for the past 2000 years around the globe, if Anarchy which has been a known theoretical model for all that time actually worked, it should be very widespread by now.

        Categorically false, you could’ve made this argument about capitalism during feudalist times, capitalist countries absolutely do dogpile anarchists and communists.

        This is so much bullshit. the modern form of capitalism is only 5-600 years old. EVERY society before that cannot have been oppressed by capitalism.

        No, but they were then oppressed by feudal lords…

        Capitalism also isn’t a form of governance, it’s a method to facilitate economic activity. Which is why ALL democracies are capitalist. Capitalism may suck hard, but we have nothing to replace it with yet.

        No, all democracies are capitalist because capitalist destroy democracies that aren’t. The reason all communist countries are authoritarian is because only authoritarians can hold onto power when the CIA, the worlds largest military tries to destroy them.

        Anarchy is not an alternative to capitalism, on the contrary. Anarchy as an idea was always about pursuing individual interests. The exact opposite of socialism. To facilitate the pursuance of individual interests, capitalism in a democracy is the best model we know of.

        You again don’t even know what that means. Which anarchist philosophers did you get these ideas from? Name them.

        source

        • -> View More Comments