More important than opposition to the current system is the prefiguration of an anarchic one. So much online discourse is about attacking, a lot less is about building. I drew this to remind myself and others that confronting the state is only a part of the puzzle and building new systems without it is also important.
Licence (as always): CC-0, No rights reserved.
Build a state where you’re guaranteed a life.
Everything a state guarantees they can take away. Do you want to give your life to the state?
Instead you could build a network of people, a community, to guarantee life and well-being of yourself and those around you. You don’t need a state to do that. In fact believing in the state will actively hamper you as you look towards it for solutions you could make yourself.
The democratic state is beholden entirely to its members. You’re asking if I want to be held accountable by myself and others, the answer is yes and I want the same for everyone.
Representative democracy is beholden to the majority. if they majority voted to kill you, would you just accept it and let them?
Also who are the members? what chooses who is and isn’t a member of this body that has the right to your life? A made up line in the sand? Why do I have to rely on the opinion of someone who could be half a continent away? The only people I want to be held accountable to are the ones that I have to interact with, because others don’t know me, and they shouldn’t have any say on whether or not I get to live.
Anarchy is exactly what you say: being held accountable by other members of your society. It just doesn’t try and mash millions of people with different viewpoints together and shrug when they inevitably start killing each other. It allows for dynamic formation of groups that think alike and uses the overlaps to build a network of people.
What is morality if not the belief of the majority? The only other option is actionable morality of the few, leading to tribalism and fuedalism.
An essential part of laying groundwork is to live the change.
- co-op everything you can in your day-to-day: credit unions, buying clubs, cohousing, fuel & groceries (western canadians can join these), tool shares, etc
- barter networks amongst friends, neighbours, and via classified ads
- use community facilities and dive back by volunteering
- mutual aid networks
- grow some food plants
- pay it forward
And Federate!
Build a life without the state.
How?
confronting the state
How is this going?
If you are actually curious here’s some links:
- Andrewism: https://www.youtube.com/@Andrewism/videos
- Anarchist FAQ: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html (maybe take a look at J.5)
Andrewism
I am perfectly aware of Andrewism’s work - I stopped watching them (and most anarchist media) because I don’t think they are actually serious about performing the real theoretical work preconfiguration would require.
Anarchist FAQ
I am perfectly aware of the Anarchist FAQ, too.
Real theoretical work is a concept I don’t understand
Real theoretical work is a concept I don’t understand
A critique of hierarchy - no matter how airtight it might happen to be - is not a suitable basis for preconfiguration.
Knowing what something mustn’t be is not nearly enough - one must know what something must be in order to build it.
deleted by creator
Libertarianism masquerading as leftism.
This is an anarchist comm. We aren’t masquerading anything. We fight against all injustice: state, class, gender, sexuality. You know. Liberty for everyone equally.
K. The belief you can do that without community, and while centering self-interest, is classically childish anarchism.
But the memes here are good usually.
you might be confusing anarchism, the exact polar opposite of “without community” with the hyper-individualist flavor of american libertarianism
I don’t think you understand anarchism or what we mean when we say “without a state”. Hint: it’s the opposite from “without community, and while centering self-interest,”
How would a stateless society enforce contracts?
The way it worked for millennia in societies without a powerful state –
by shunning the contract breakers in your community.Just extraordinarily naive.
What kind of contracts do you expecting within a moneyless system?
Are you for real? Do you think work will cease to exist? Monetary compensation isn’t the only thing that can be exchanged for work/art/etc.
We already have all sorts of contracts that don’t involve money directly. Marriage is a contract, and that wouldn’t just cease to exist.
People are selfish and greedy. There needs to be something to try to prevent and/or punish that. And literal force/violence is the only thing that can ever do it. Without it, there will always be people who abuse it.
So what happens is the person with the biggest gun/stick/army/etc. wins the dispute. Every time.
That’s how you end up with feudalism. How come libertarians always need to personally re-learn every mistake and lesson we’ve already learned the hard way? It is literally currently destroying the US government.
Learn some history and we don’t have to repeat the same mistakes again and again.
People aren’t selfish or greedy. People are ambitious and in the current society those people are raised to believe that to be the best you have to be selfish and greedy. They aren’t traits you are born with, they are learned.
But anarchy still is the best way to deal with greedy people as any kind of hierarchy will just allow the greedy people to get to the top. Hierarchies don’t punish the greedy, they elevate them to the highest positions in society as those that aren’t concerned with other peoples well being can always find a way to gain authority over them.
There needs to be something to try to prevent and/or punish that.
Anarchy has that something. You can counter abuse without being abusive yourself. We can build social structures that prevent greed without hierarchy. The solution isn’t to give some people a monopoly on violence because that position will always attract the most violent. It’s to build a social networks that sees problems before they happen and provides support. Punishment isn’t a productive method of preventing harm. It’s vengeance, not prevention.
What is currently destroying the US isn’t libertarianism, it’s bad education, mass media manipulation and a bunch of people following orders.
Learn some history
OK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Commune
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MakhnovshchinaMarriage is a contract, and that wouldn’t just cease to exist.
What kind of enforcement would a “marriage contract” need in a moneyless society?
People are selfish and greedy. There needs to be something to try to prevent and/or punish that. And literal force/violence is the only thing that can ever do it. Without it, there will always be people who abuse it.
Greedy selfish people can’t abuse a system that doesn’t allow accumulation of wealth.
Sidenote that this is an anarchist space and while we tolerate such some debate, we don’t have to tolerate your shitty attitude. Check the sidebar.
I understand how you believe it’ll work. I think it’s naive and unrealistic. Especially as a first system post-capitalism.
Cool story bro
Yep. Obsession with self-interest, and arrogance to believe they can thrive without community. So childish.
Mutual Aid and community are core to the ideology. You’ve either made up your mind before even attempting to learn about something, or you’re trolling.
I just don’t agree it can be organized without a state right now.
That’s a fine disagreement (necessity of state/arrogance) to have, but don’t try to make up ideas about it being excessively self interested or anti-communal.
You’re still going to be argued with here but you won’t get a respectful response unless you show you’re acting in good faith.
Womp womp
Because the state does so much for you? Most people (in America at least) don’t have the luxury of the state even giving a passing thought to their well being
You’re talking about a state controlled by the wealthy. I’m talking about a state controlled by the workers.
