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?

  • Carighan Maconar
    15•1 year ago

    Yes, anarchy is an interrim state in which no power mechanic has yet taken hold. But naturally it will, in one way or another.

    • @janonymous@lemmy.world
      14•1 year ago

      That is a misconception. Anarchism is a equal distribution of power among all participants. This will not change “naturally”. It can be changed by either efforts from within to establish a single individual or group as a ruler over the rest, or by outside forces. Neither I would classify as happening just naturally.

      • @lily33@lemm.ee
        8•1 year ago

        It is natural. Any particular individual’s actions are not natural - but the fact that, amongst a large, diverse group of people, there will be someone who would try to establish themselves or their group as rulers - is just a statistical property. So any anarchic system needs a mechanism to counter that.

        • @janonymous@lemmy.world
          2•1 year ago

          There is a lot of confusion around anarchism, because it is a negative description: It’s a collective without leader, without governing institutions. It doesn’t say much about how this collective organizes instead. So you could call the chaotic state after a government coup Anarchy. But that isn’t what anarchists are talking about and I don’t think that is what OP meant either.

          Anarchy as a deliberate system is when a group of people decides to work or live together without selecting a leader or any other form of government, instead resolving decisions that affect everyone together. In that sense it is not an interim state, a leadership-vacuum just waiting to be filled. Although of course Anarchy can transition into another system by various means, but so can every other system as well.

    • @shapesandstuff@feddit.de
      6•1 year ago

      Not necessarily. Anarchy doesn’t imply chaos or complete absence of societal structures.
      It mostly means no central ruling group/class or individual holds the monopoly on violence and government.

      i’m also not super educated on this but this much i know