Comment on This is getting bad. Like, really really bad.
LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 days agoI don’t think you fully understand what anarchism is. Lack of hierarchy does not mean no organizational framework. It means there are no hierarchies.
Nukes have no purpose existing to begin with. The best thing to do with them would be to dismantle them and use their resources for other things. I don’t know why you have immediately decided to imagine an anarchist freed territory as requiring nuclear armaments. Or why you think the litmus test of whether a political ideology is valid or not depends on the answer to “can it allow for nuclear holocaust at the push of a button”.
You seemingly have imagined that an anarchist revolution would intend to preserve the functioning of modern geopolitical superpowers. Needless to say, no. Anarchism in practical implantation results in societies that look dramatically different (including extent anarchist free territories). Ones that don’t partake in overproduction and vast environmental destruction. Ones that are concerned principally with the well-being of the people who live within them.
artificialfish@programming.dev 5 days ago
Your second paragraph just proves you don’t understand the nature of power. Why did Russia Cuba and NK need nukes? Because people without nukes are weak to their enemies. So until the anarchist territory is global, it needs to participate in global geopolitics, in which nukes are actually one of your primary bargaining chips.
Otherwise you’re just a piece of land with no government, and most historical invasions take place when land becomes an easy conquest. Because land is materially useful.