Comment

There’s the state neighbouring anarchists which can’t form a state and so probably they exist within the borders of some state unless some state respects not a state

source

Sort:hotnew top

UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
U r assuming that anarchists would be peaceful n just roll over on their backs to show their tummies to Genghis Khan.

The goal of anarchism is freedom. The existence of a State means no freedom. Thus, anarchist militias unite to fight this threat. A stateless society doesn’t equate an unorganised society.

source
- emmie@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Good luck being efficient and quick without central command. There’s a reason anarchism didn’t survive evolutionary process
  
  source
  - UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Who said there would be no centralised command? It would just be opt out. If an individual/community wanted to opt out of this, there would be noone forcing them to not do so.
    
    As for evolution of political systems due to natural selection, would you say the same about democracy? Stable democracy that we know about today has existed only for the past 300 years. Women got the right to vote this century. If u r living under a dictatorship, would you use the same argument of natural selection to not fight for a democracy?
    
    source
    emmie@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Who? Well maybe because if there are 1000 of communities all with different ideas then good luck agreeing to any basic thing like who is going to lead that command.
    
    I would like to see this 🤣
    
    source