Anarchism

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

He does… we both outlined some examples…. I am asking you what corrective course do you think might work better.

The solution he proposes involves locking "sequestered citizens" up in "monitored democratic rehabilitation communities with required rehabilitative measures" in the case of the worst crimes. That's a prison. I'm not going to prescribe a solution to a situation that I have no part in. I think the community in question should decide to handle wrongdoers how they see fit on a case by case basis.

ahistorical assertion.

I didn't say all of them, I said plenty of.... A couple of examples from Australia and Nigeria.

By these definitions, bedrooms and closets constitute as prisons, when timing out/disciplining children

Do you think a bedroom or a closet is an institution? It's only the institution surrounding it that differentiates a jail cell from (an often boringly decorated) bedroom.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] waltersf@bookwyr.me 0 points 1 week ago* (4 children)

I think the community in question should decide to punish wrongdoers how they see fit on a case by case basis.

literally what he describes earlier in that video…

situation that I have no part in.

wait, you're not anarchist?

Australia

[…] shaming or public ridicule[…]
exclusion from the community (eg to a particular outstation or another community, or more rarely, total exclusion).[112]
exclusion from use of facilities[118]
exile to an outstation or another community.[119]

Nigeria

public shaming, corporal correction, spiritual rites, banishment, and, in some contexts under later influences, corporal fines prescribed by Islamic or colonial law [5].
shaming, and ritual highly credible - the threat of ostracism or spiritual sanction supplied strong social incentives for compliance [5].
creating hybrid institutions (community courts, ADR schemes) that combine customary legitimacy with statutory safeguards [8, 9].
6.1.2. Social Regulation Through Banishment and Ostracism
Banishment served as a major sanction for offenses that carried spiritual pollution or posed a continuing threat to communal safety. According to Nadel [5], offenders guilty of morally dangerous acts-such as sacrilege or persistent violence-could be expelled from the community. Ostracism, a milder variant, was used for kinship violations including incest or breaches of marriage norms. These exclusionary practices embodied the African belief that wrongdoing disrupts both social and spiritual equilibrium [1, 4]. By physically or socially removing the offender, the Nupe community sought to restore balance and avoid misfortune.

Literally imprisonment.

Do you think a bedroom or a closet is an institution?'

The institution is the guardians, the physical cages, the perpetrators, and the victims.

It’s only the institution surrounding it that differentiates a jail cell from (an often boringly decorated) bedroom.

so like a third party doing this, instead of the folks affected by the wrong doing?

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 week ago* (3 children)

literally what he describes earlier in that video…

And then he says "they should lock people up".

wait, you’re not anarchist?

I am not partial to the crime or wrongdoing in question. If I am, then I will have an opinion. My point is that prescribing solutions from the outside of a situation is authoritarian. Drawing up a constitution and a model for totally-not-prisons (institutions that will perpetuate themselves at the cost of solving the problems they were built to solve) is authoritarian.

Literally imprisonment.

If you think that shaming, ostracism, exclusion and exile are forms of imprisonment (which is different from prison as an institution, but we'll get to that) , I don't know what to tell you. Sure, shaming and similar rites probably involve detainment like stocks and stuff, but the timescales involved are way shorter and the purpose is shame, not detainment. Also why did you bold ADR?

The institution is the guardians, the physical cages, the perpetrators, and the victims.

so like a third party doing this, instead of the folks affected by the wrong doing?

You don't know what institutions are? That makes sense. An institution is an established custom, practice, relationship, organization, or behavioral pattern of importance in the life of a community or society. Marriage is an institution. Prison is an institution. They are frameworks that exist independently of the people flowing through them or the physical infrastructure facilitating them. They grow in complexity in response to new problems (like more paperwork for a marriage and organizations establishing new departments, see the organizational charts of any government from a hundred years ago vs. today), they perpetuate themselves and calcify. They are the machines that anarchists rage against. The first sentence of the wikipedia page on anarchism:

Anarchism is a mostly far-left political philosophy and movement that seeks to abolish all institutions that perpetuate authority, coercion, or hierarchy...

A prison (no matter how rehabilitative or how well managed with democratic oversight) is still an institution that perpetuates authority (of the guards over the inmates for example), and quite obviously coercion. Do you see the contradiction of trying to formulate an institution that enacts coercion in a supposedly anarchistic system?

Ostracism and exile for example are much more compatible with anarchism as forms of discouraging bad behavior, because they only limit the positive freedoms of the person. No coercion needed when the community just refuses to engage with the person until they right their wrongs.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] waltersf@bookwyr.me 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

Family is an institution. Community is an institution. Punishment is an institution. Therefore the act of shaming and excluding someone in isolation from the community as punishment for wrong doings is an institution. I guess we have different definitions of authoritarianism, that the edicts of punishments in aboriginal Australia & Nigeria fit your definition of authoritarianism.

Also why did you bold ADR?

so like a third party doing this, instead of the folks affected by the wrong doing?

re institutions

A prison (no matter how rehabilitative or how well managed with democratic oversight) is still an institution that perpetuates authority (of the guards over the inmates for example), and quite obviously coercion.

Then aboriginals still coerce punishments in isolation and shaming as imprisonment.

contradiction of trying to formulate an institution that enacts coercion in a supposedly anarchistic system?

I think this is paradox you can't seem to realize. At what point is wrong doing rehabilitation and reparations coercion, and when is not? The paradox here is how much solidarity and intersection you trying uphold. Unless you think wrong doings shouldn't be coerced at all.

No coercion needed when the community just refuses to engage with the person until they right their wrongs.

What if the wrong doing was coercions in itself: Like rape, murder, subjugation. How do ostracize and exile a rapist, murderer, and subjugator to cease these coercions on the community?

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

Coercion != institutional coercion. Spontaneous self defense is an obvious example of coercion that isn't institutional, as in an established practice. If someone punches you in the face, you don't stop to think about what the established customs and practices dictate should be done, no, you punch back. A community kicking someone out because they can't behave, while it would probably end up becoming established practice in time, is not established in that sense before it has become a habit for the community. Humans form institutions all the time, that is unavoidable because problems will pop up that require solutions, and then applying those solutions will become habitual because that's more efficient than thinking every problem over from first principles. That's why anarchism is a never ending struggle with no end and the anarchists within that society would have to start raging against the exile-machine when it starts to exile people who shouldn't be exiled (like maybe people who disapprove of that institution). But setting out to build organized institutions of coercion even before a problem arises that would require a coercive solution that would afterwards become established practice, is backwards. The people who build this hypothetical society should cross that bridge when they get there and hopefully enough of them will realize to constantly keep a sceptical eye on any of those practices so that they don't become too established so as to cause unnecessary harm by sheer inertia.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] waltersf@bookwyr.me 1 point 1 week ago

Cool.
I have a revolution to insurrect.
It’ll require a lof of dialogue.
But hopefully oppressors surrender.