Anarchism

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com [S] 3 points 2 months ago

Lizard looks kinda sussy here

parent

[–] phil@lemmy.openitco.de 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com [S] 2 points 2 months ago

i think selectoral theory would be more fitting here

parent

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

Proving it is irrelevant, the point is to change it.

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Have to name it to tame it

parent

[+] DudleyMason@lemmy.ml -8 points 2 months ago (6 children)

No such thing as the absence of hierarchy. Removing explicit hierarchies simply creates implicit ones, which actually tend to elevate worse people than explicit hierarchies.

The Tyranny of Stuctureless https://share.google/SVXexcnipMwEed6pr

Research Reveals Pervasive Implicit Hierarchies for Race, Religion, and Age – Association for Psychological Science – APS https://share.google/mLKLVtIqyxcRXuEj5

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] punkisundead@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The Tyranny of Stuctureless https://share.google/SVXexcnipMwEed6pr

I think thats a grave misreading of this text when you have it as a source for "Removing explicit hierarchies simply creates implicit ones".

Its a call out for groups that do not give themselves clear structures, roles, processes for decision making etc which can result in implicit hierarchies, especiallg long term. Bringing "structure" into those groups or building up groups from the ground up with horizontal structures are ways take on these issues.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] DudleyMason@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

No, those are ways to make sure your "horizontal structures" are dominated by the most charismatic Neurotypicals in the room at all times, to the detriment of anyone else.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] punkisundead@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

Could you maybe explain how you come to this opinion? Because its hard to follow for me

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] DudleyMason@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

Observation of the social dynamics described in the links above as they apply to any social group anywhere.

Humans are Apes. Every troop of Apes has a leader, and further stratification below that. Humans are no different. If there isn't a structure (deference to elders, to the smartest, etc) pushing for a different outcome, the dominant ape in a human troop is generally the most charismatic individual, with the strata below that generally determined by similarity or proximity to the leader. In any group larger than a handful, the most charismatic will almost certainly be Neurotypical.