A Case for Anarchism
(youtu.be)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (58)
sorted by:
This is essentially what happens. Anarchism leads to tribalism which leads to states. The largest gangster wins against smaller gangsters. His point about disputing this with digital technologies is really interesting though. Something there for sure
I don't understand the question. If someone decides to start a dictatorship whose responsibility is it to stop them? Whoever chooses to
There are no responsibilities in an anarchy - just people doing what they will, right? What he's asking is who can stop an anarchy from logically turning into a tyranny because the strongest naturally asserts themselves and assume power?
It's completely dependent on what the individuals decide, if they believe they have a responsibility then they are responsible. I believe the idea that the strongest naturally asserts themselves a false premise, when it comes to violence It's the person unencumbered by morality that wins. That's why a lot of CEOs are psychopathic and sociopathic. It's the smartest that wins, it's the person that understands violence on a fundamental level not the strongest. I'd use Russia as an example Putin is not the strongest he's just willing to do what his competition will not. There's a difference between strength and ruthlessness.
So anarchy is whatever the individuals in the society choose it to be? Ok, then I'll make the case individuals in our society have made the choice (and affirm that choice every day) to have the form of government we live under.
It doesn't matter whether it's the smartest or the physically strongest that asserts their will on the rest - it's still will to power and the rest is means to an end. If authoritarian government is not antithetical to your particular definition of anarchy, then what's the argument about?
So you are talking about a hypothetical dictatorship where exactly? In our heavily armed society? What kind of force are you talking about in the 21st century? Superior firepower? You understand modern militaries have proven themselves ineffective in asymmetrical warfare?
Having thought about it you are questioning with a false premise that has nothing to do with anarchy. The same could be asked of any system against a "warlord" Do you think being a group of Anarchists would preclude them from forming a collective defense or military?
a) Those who suggest anarchism gain permission from those consenting to be anarchists to enforce.
b) Question implies ones consent to suggested progressivism (quest towards outcome); hence now waiting for suggested answers from another.
Those who question others are permitting answers to be enforced.
Nature isn't a quest towards outcome; but each ones resistance (life) within origin (inception towards death) as temporary problem within ongoing solution.