• FiniteBanjoBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Removed by mod

    • RedDoozer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Actually, there seems to be a bit of a mix-up. Let me clarify.

      In an anarchist group, enforcing anything goes against its fundamental principles.

      If personal gain is the motive, one isn’t truly aligned with the group’s social contract and isn’t considered part of it.

      Decisions are made collectively, without hierarchy. Voting or delegating organisational tasks to sub-groups is the norm.

      I won’t go into words like “attacking,” “defense,” or “threats” as they are military terms, far from the anarchist ethos.

      And I won’t call you “bro” or make you read theory. I feel you won’t.

        • RedDoozer@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why defenseless? The entire organization can defense itself from outsiders. No need of hierarchy for that.

          • Chuymatt@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just one gifted sociopath dooms it from the inside…

            I long for mutual aid society, but every time I have participated in any form of it, I’ve had to back away as it invariably becomes toxic. I just don’t have the energy to keep fighting, honestly.

    • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Anarchism is really against coercion, that’s what is meant by hierarchy. Hierarchy only makes sense if it’s used for coercion of other’s behavior.

      There is no reason a group of people can’t organize in a voluntary hierarchy to complete a task without the use of coercion.

      Imagine a group of 10 anarchist making pizza for the homeless. Two of them make pizza for a living and 8 are there for the week to help out. There is nothing preventing those 8 people from taking instruction from the two that know how to make pizza. Nobody is coerced to be there or to do anything.

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      We don’t need to incentivse not selling people out. Heirarchy creates a set of incentives TO sell people out. Remove those incentives and people will for the most part not sell people out. You’ve got it exactly backwards.

      Ask your buddy mao about anarchist fighting forces. He literally took anarchist tactics around decentralized militias and used them to great success. The Vietnamese as well. Or have a look at the Spanish revolution, rojava, the Ukrainian black army, or the zapatistas if you need more proof that decentralized militant forces are effective and capable. It doesn’t warrant an in detail explanation because “but how fight if democracy???” is weak as fuck.