a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by b_b
b_b  ·  4347 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Experiment: What's YOUR most controversial opinion, Hubski?

Everyone except the Somalis. Ask them how awesome anarchy is.





JakobVirgil  ·  4347 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The Somalis may live in Chaos but they are not Anarchists. I don't think egalitarianism and the rejection of force are the central pillars of Somali life.

vlehto  ·  4342 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Anarchism incorporates the idea that strict ideology doesn't work
from minimum_wage.

    egalitarianism and the rejection of force are the central pillars
from you.

But you aren't supposed to agree because you're anarchists right?

JakobVirgil  ·  4342 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I am confused rejection of Ideology does not contradict the goals of an egalitarian and non-coercive society .

vlehto  ·  4342 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Considering how many non egalitarian and coercive societies we have seen in the history "egalitarian and non-coercive" sounds very idealistic to me.

Idealism would sound OK to me if you would admit that these things would be a huge challenge to anarchist society.

Or if you would say that it would be "somewhat egalitarian and mostly non-coercive" then the whole thing starts to seem realistic. But it would not be anarchy anymore.

JakobVirgil  ·  4342 days ago  ·  link  ·  

For most of the life of the species all societies were thought to have been "egalitarian and non-coercive", hunter-gatherer cultures tend to be that way. It was not until the agrarian revolution the societal stratification became possible (outside of a few fishing cultures). You need to have enough extra calories to support a non-productive class.

    (1) Or if you would say that it would be "somewhat egalitarian and mostly non-coercive" then the whole thing starts to seem realistic. (2) But it would not be anarchy anymore.
1 - Exactly, Equality and non-coercion are goals, choices. 2 - only if you define anarchy in a way anarchists historically don't.