anarchists are by definition not a homogeneous group.
we share some values and many tools. Decentralization, consensus and price as a synchronization mechanism.
My lady, you're an anarchist in your heart and you don't even know it 😁
Discussion
Catholic anarchy is an oxymoron.
I'm not so sure about this.
On Catholicism and Anarchy, specifically on Dorothy Day:
An anecdote is not a statistic.
Dorothy Day appears to have been both Catholic and anarchist. I'm arguing these two practices aren't incompatible. What statistics would you be looking for?
Distributists aren't anarchists.
The two groups aren't mutually-exclusive, either.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/w-j-whitman-anarcho-distributism-and-anarchist-federalism
>The distributists have also set themselves apart from the anarchists. Their critique of anarchism is largely a Rawlsian critique. John Rawls justified the existence of the State on the basis of assuming that people would prefer a society with some safety net or basic welfare system to a society without such a thing. The problem with this justification of statism is that it assumes that only statism can provide such a society. In reality, a consensus-based conciliar model of governance in a stateless society could also provide a welfare system. The members of the community could voluntarily contribute money towards universal basic income, universal healthcare insurance, and other such welfare measures. In fact, it is likely that any collectivistic, communist, or mutualist anarchist society would have some sort of welfare system in place. There is no reason why Rawls’ argument would lend support to a statist liberal democracy over a voluntaryist or anarchist society with a welfare system. And as long as an anarchist society can have rules and social order and a welfare system of some sort, then there is no reason that an anarchist society could not also be a distributist society.
Sure, but...
In a hypothesis, if one thing is found to disagree with the hypothesis, it needs to be reworked.
If you think I'm lying about the anarchists I know, then that's an entirely different matter. If you believe me to be truthful about what I know, that shows that your premises are not correct and that you should revisit your logic.
rules without a ruler.
(i've never thought God as a ruler)
It is an anachronism because the RCC has pretty much BEEN the state since the big kerfuffle between the bishop of Rome and the rest of the bishops.
And that, at the very based of things, is where my issue with the RCC starts. It's really hard for most Catholics to understand how steeped they are in statist ideology.
Nothing by definition is a homogeneous group. We may be catholic in our heart and not know it. There is no absolute monopoly.