I’m politically agnostic and have moved from a slightly conservative stance to a vastly more progressive stance (european). i still dont get the more niche things like tankies and anarchists at this point but I would like to, without spending 10 hours reading endless manifests (which do have merit, no doubt, but still).

Can someone explain to me why anarchy isnt the guy (or gal, or gang, or entity) with the bigger stick making the rules?

  • Val@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    All murders happen because of emotional (killing someone in anger), economical (Theft gone wrong) or psychological (Doesn’t realize it’s wrong) reasons. none of these is prevented by sticking the murderer in a box after the murder.

    All of these are prevented by building strong social network to manage any harmful impulses before something happens, which is something any reasonable anarchist would agree with.

    Also If you think the list is incomplete then feel free to give another example.

    Oh yeah also political assassinations and wars. But your comment already addresses those.

    I think a better wording is that anarchy is naive. And I’d rather be naive than accept that this is the best we can come up with, because that’s depressing.