all 79 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 40 points 7 months ago (12 children)

Power corrupts, but we can't just make power disappear... The only logical solution is to spread it as thinly as possible amongst everyone, so it corrupts as little as possible. Ergo, anarchy.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 7 months ago* (8 children)

    What if instead we totally alienated a bunch of the worst people to ever exist from any consequence, built society on appeasing them at any cost, and then murdered everyone who wanted anything else,though?

    I personally think thats a much better idea, and will murder you if you dont agree.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Lol usually I'm the one telling others to read Graeber.

    Here's the thing, that kinda is part of human history. It is how we ended up in the society we live in today. All of these countries exist because they killed or subjugated everyone else who said otherwise.

    Yes, Graeber exposes that other societies have existed and can potentially exist but that doesn't negate the history that led us to today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Part of it. So is the steam engine.

    All hietory led us to today. The most recent proximal cause is not totality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    No one is saying totality. Do you not get that "a summary" means "condensed and excluding details"?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    A summary of human history:

    Steam engine go brrrrrrrrr

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Crazy how we have a phrase like "power corrupts" yet refuse to treat it as a mental illness.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago* (23 children)

    The problem is that people that want power will find ways to get power even if there's no established structures that give people power.

    How do you prevent that from happening?

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Well, there might need to be an equal and opposite reaction in order to keep it in check. If some people are just inherently evil and desire power over others, then I imagine there would also be inherently good people and desire to protect others.

    I don't think you can "prevent" this outright. That's why there's talk of "vigilance" and being "watchful" when it comes to government/democracy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I absolutely agree with you, but this requires people to mostly think like that. And if people already mostly think like that, then it is actually almost completely irrelevant what political system we have. The question is how to establish such a mindset in most people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Hmmm.. idk if "establishing a mindset in people" is viable tho. That kinda sounds like "make them think a certain way". I'm reminded of the adage you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink you know?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (7 children)

    Establish customs and structures that prevent power. It needs vigilance. There's evidence that before agriculture some humans exhibited "reverse dominance hierarchy," where if someone tried to assert dominance, the group would team up and ostracise, exile, or execute them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    So all I gotta do is be the person delegated to the vigilance task and I'm golden for a takeover

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Zapatistas frequently rotate roles. There are no professional police or politicians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    No no of course not, it'll only take a minute, and hey, I did such a good job with food distribution I can do it again if you want....

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    AFAIK, they aim so that every single person is rotated to every role (and only hold those roles for weeks before being rotated out); it's not like an election thing; it's more like a duty that everyone has to do. Whatever they're doing has been working for 3 decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Democracy and the separation of power is such a structure that we already have. It works perfectly fine if "the group would team up" and vote people that try to assert dominance out.

    We're just missing the "customs" that would make people do just that, and the question is how to establish this custom.

    It was already clear that we need customs that make people not give other people power, the question that I posed was how to start those customs you talk about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    People arent born seeking power. That is an idea they get at a certain point. Why? Can we not nuture people away from this path?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Social status seeking is a behaviour we share with chimps, so it probably dates back to at least our last shared ancestor, ~6-7 Mya. It's observed in most social mammals, so maybe as far back as the rise of mammals like 66 Mya.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    How do you know your first sentence is true?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    "Goo goo gaa gaa I want to have power over others" is no one's first sentence. Its an idea you have to learn at some point

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    No one's first words are "goo goo gaa gaa I want to put my penis in your pussy" and for some reason humans still manage to figure that one out like 12 years later without explicitly being taught it.

    Just because something is not immediately apparent in a baby does not mean that it isn't innate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    the red flags are waving. Wtf do you mean TWELVE YEARS LATER? Side note, that too is pretty thoroughly taught by society, especially these days. And there are tons of people, particularly overly prudish religious couples, who dont figure it out and have to have someone explain to them which hole they are supposed to be trying.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago (21 children)

    I talked about anarchism with someone recently, and "evil people" was their main argument.

    I've been thinking about it a lot. My point of view is that power structures give those evil people an unmatched oportunity to gain power over others. I think most of them are in politics, be it in democracy or authoritarian regimes. They are the best at climbing hierarchies and have the motivation to do so, unlike most people.

    But still, it seems that having evil people in politics is somehow better than having to deal with them directly for a lot of people. It may be the fear of unknown - governments might do bad things on a much bigger scale, but at least they are predictable. That's just my interpretation though.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    anarchism doesn't mean you can't get organised.

    that said, it's pretty damned hard to defend against an attacking nation, if you don't have taxpayer funded hierachical military. hard doesn't mean impossible tho

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    That must be why they're still around, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    The SDF is still around defending AANES in one of the most conflict-ridden regions of the world. They call themselves Democratic Confederalists rather than anarchists, but they are the nearest long-standing polity to anarchist ideals.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (13 children)

    No you dont undersrand! Everything i want is made of basement kids and if i dont get it ill be sad, but if i think about making it happen ill be sad.

    So i need to make sure we all just agree that dping wjat the worst monsters we can find tell us to and and killing anyone who disagrees. You disagreeing makes me feel bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (12 children)

    That attitude is a large part of the reason people turn against anarchy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (10 children)

    That you should walk away from omelas instead of killing for it? Yeah. I get that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    No, I meant the being a condescending ass part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

    I have othermodes of critique, but ecpect youd appreciate them even less.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    The way you get people on your side is to win them over by educating them on the positives, not criticizing them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    It's not that humans are inherently evil, it's that inherently evil humans exist.

    The main problem is that enough people believe the lies the evil ones tell them and let them have power to fuck everyone.

    Humans are tribalistic animals, and that trait is part of why it's so easy for horrible people to convince others to do horrible things.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    A quote from Dune if I recall correctly is power attracts the corruptable, not exactly that it corrupts. So not that humans are evil but we offer positions that shouldn't be given to anyone that wants it. Mean okay I'm sure there's good people that try for elected positions for sure.

    Also quote from hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, no one that seeks power should be given it. Or similar was in reference to who they elect president.

    While hitchhiker's guide is comedy I think it holds well, people who seek power want to abuse it. People resultant to accept a position may be better to administer. I think, while quite different moods in their texts, they were saying the same thing. One (quite boring and dry, no pun intended, at first read) another just silly with some commentary on life.

    Funny how that works cause you'd think democracy would weed others out. But gestures to democracies these days we see how things work with media manipulation. I think the hitchhiker's guide worked and well was made due to the education of the author.

    So why the eff aren't we supporting system where we can cultivate ideas to improve ourselves rather than hearing media tell us not to like someone who is probably cool anyways?

    Yes a north american view but right wing has been spreading and all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago*

    I'd love it if campaigning was outlawed. You get a list of candidates and their voting history on key issues.

    If people had actually looked at her voting records, Harris would have been a great choice. Her Senate voting history is pretty damn close to Bernie's.

    But for some reason people still listen to campaign messaging even though it's well known politicians lie through their teeth to get elected.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    Thats why no man should have power over others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Hard agree! Unless it's me of course, because my right is more right than others.

    Jokes aside, it's obvious that power structures arrise in nature like cancer in a body. The socialy disadvantegous take over, and cannibalize everything.

    A holocracy perhaps? I still don't have more than a vague concept of what could be attempted. I know that self-sufficiency is GOOD, and I want to encourage it asmuch as possible.

    This prevents leverage and exploitation of you and your neighbours.

    This, however, does not mean standing idly aside, as someone else gets exploited. It should be an ethic to help your neighbour to the point where they can be self-sufficient, as this protects YOU from them turning on you in desperate times.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Outsiders are Evil By Nature.

    Insiders are Blessed By Their Commitment to The Tribe.

    Dear Leader came to power by virtue of extraordinary merit and is the most capable tribesman in leading our Blessed In-Group against their Diabolical Out-Group. We give him our loyalty, our labor, and our wealth voluntarily, with the expectation that he will return it to us ten-fold.

    And hey, look, the market is up! The Gods shine on our Glorious Hallowed Kingdom of The Virtuous And Just.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Don't worry, the people in power are good. They said so themselves.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    maybe they care

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    I was talking with someone a while ago about anarchism and internet moderators. I said moderators shouldn't moderate based on their feelings, because power corrupts. Moderators should hold themselves to the rules, and be removed when they fail to do so. The other person said that the principle of free association means moderators can ban whoever they want, and putting limits on bans would be tyranny.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment