I haven’t found an adequate explanation of how anarchism works to not be tinder for the fires of corruption and power consolidation.
I get that these are diseases of all societies, but the institutional systems of a liberal democracy seems at least to slow the process down. Granted, we’ve not had a one that has lasted for a thousand years.
So —seriously asking — how does anarchism work to last a thousand years?
I am an enemy of the state in general. All states. Authoritarianism 100% exists. Though I get it. You have a different taste in boots. Authoritarianism of course can’t exist without the state. And the state once it’s achieved a significant size inevitably Trends toward authoritarianism. But they aren’t the same thing that’s just silly. Though if you can explain how a governing state built on something like total/absolute consent is authoritarian/oppressive, I’m all ears.
You’re not making sense. If you are you the enemy of the state, why are you pretending that non-authoritarian states exist?
They obviously don’t. A state literally can’t be built on total/absolute consent unless it’s populated by the Borg. There will always be internal opposition that needs to be repressed by authority and coerced into obedience to maintain order. Hence, gibberish.
It absolutely is: prisons, police, borders, it’s all authoritarian. There can’t be such a thing as a non-authoritarian state, because if there was it would be quickly overthrown by people willing to impose authority.
I’ll at least respect anarchists for being consistent. Anyone who pretends “not me tho I’m different” is a hypocrite.
Then you realize you’re a hypocrit who won’t do anything to oppose the government now. Having you usher in another set of authoritarian dipshits that you happen to agree with doesn’t help. The good news is yall are too feckless to usher in anything.
So maybe we can effect change in the system now.
If every voter had a mamdani to choose at home maybe things get better.
The concept of “authoritarianism” is gibberish, that’s why it can be applied to the left and right. All states are authoritarian.
Unless you’re an anarchist, you’re an authoritarian too. You just think your authority is legitimate and fair and righteous.
I haven’t found an adequate explanation of how anarchism works to not be tinder for the fires of corruption and power consolidation.
I get that these are diseases of all societies, but the institutional systems of a liberal democracy seems at least to slow the process down. Granted, we’ve not had a one that has lasted for a thousand years.
So —seriously asking — how does anarchism work to last a thousand years?
Oh no, I’m not an anarchist. I’m a Marxist, I understand the state to be an organ by which one class represses another.
That’s why I’m saying “authoritarianism” is gibberish. There’s no other way to organize complex society. For now.
So you understand the state is the organ by which the vanguard represses the working class, yet you’re for it?
I am an enemy of the state in general. All states. Authoritarianism 100% exists. Though I get it. You have a different taste in boots. Authoritarianism of course can’t exist without the state. And the state once it’s achieved a significant size inevitably Trends toward authoritarianism. But they aren’t the same thing that’s just silly. Though if you can explain how a governing state built on something like total/absolute consent is authoritarian/oppressive, I’m all ears.
You’re not making sense. If you are you the enemy of the state, why are you pretending that non-authoritarian states exist?
They obviously don’t. A state literally can’t be built on total/absolute consent unless it’s populated by the Borg. There will always be internal opposition that needs to be repressed by authority and coerced into obedience to maintain order. Hence, gibberish.
That’s not what authoritarianism is at all.
It absolutely is: prisons, police, borders, it’s all authoritarian. There can’t be such a thing as a non-authoritarian state, because if there was it would be quickly overthrown by people willing to impose authority.
I’ll at least respect anarchists for being consistent. Anyone who pretends “not me tho I’m different” is a hypocrite.
Ok, cool, and then what. Not sure what do you bring to the table here? Water is wet. Fork found in the kitchen.
I’m just observing that authoritarianism is essentially “water is wet” as a political concept. It’s vacuous and useless.
Then you realize you’re a hypocrit who won’t do anything to oppose the government now. Having you usher in another set of authoritarian dipshits that you happen to agree with doesn’t help. The good news is yall are too feckless to usher in anything.
So maybe we can effect change in the system now.
If every voter had a mamdani to choose at home maybe things get better.