They don’t teach this in public schooling…
Discussion
Problem is that it is not for a scholar to decide what anarchy is, and I suspect that in such society some people will interpret anarchism as something different than “peace and harmony”.
The word narchy has had a clear definition since it exist, it's built exactly in the same way as monarchy or oligarchy... But it has been mistaken with chaos, and we learn to treat them as synonyms.
I have been wondering for a long time if this confusion was a deliberate attempt to undermine anarchists in politics (back in the 19th century) or an assesment of the state of anarchist organisations.
The definition has nothing to do with the idealistic “peace and harmony”. In its definition “violence and regression” fit just as good.
Indeed. The definition is more neutral : just without authority or ruler.
It's the condition of it and/or the effect of it that is more subject to question...
Well said, the reality is that government in any form, by definition, is inextricably linked to the utilization organization and execution of violence
Sure. But in this world, how do you prevent anyone (especially the wealthiest, or the most armed) to take control, use violence and form governments of their own, or at least try and release chaos? This is the blocking point in my understanding to be able to envision feasible anarchy...
Great question. I think the answer is both simple yet unsatisfying. Agorism and anarchism is not a political structure or a governing theology like democracy or socialism. Instead it is what you do everyday, you trade with who you trust, you disassociate with who you do not and most of all you do not comply with what is mandated or thrust on you simply because of someone who doesn’t understand has written it on a piece of paper. The constitution of the United States doesn’t grant you your rights but instead guarantees that your inalienable rights cannot be infringed. People know this but often misinterpret just how free you already are.
The problem is ignorance. And it’s not easily fixable.
The question becomes, “is this police officer, or senator, or judge too ignorant to understand my inherent and god given freedom before he puts me in a cage?”
The problem is ignorance, but the specific kind of ignorance that creates realities. Once a certain reality is stablished it does not matter what an individual thinks anarchism is, or freedom is. Once your phisical body can be caged, your speak silenced, idealisms does not really mater, the “fair” anarchism doesn’t really matter. So the problem is not ignorance itself, but the oppresive generally and gruadually accepted reality that ignorance creates, not because everybody is an idiot and us “smart” but because its a human trait to distract from gradual things.
I like the concept, but not sure about the etymology there. Source: DuckDuckGo, WordBook app agrees.
So no more money? People can't be equals if there are huge differences based on money. The rich can commit crimes and be happy while the rest works and goes to jail for having a bit of weed
schools just make dumb people out of kids
u pay just get CERT - it was same 50 years ago it is same now
Anarchy is the best form of governance for a society.
I would say for a society of truly mature citizens, or advanced humans. A great ideal to aim at.
💐💐💐
Liberty is the mother of order.
nostr:nevent1qqs85q9yf3455wj3nk3mxect26csegsy4g3ut7w2uywdyyhen7shddqpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqwp8d95
Archón meana ruler, leader, prince, magistrate
Anarchy is not without force, it's without rulers.
So, who commands those who execute the force?
