credit to EL_Radical

  • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Sorry but from your comment I get the idea that you have the popular misconception that anarchy just means “no government”.

    Anarchy is the destruction of all heirarchy including the state, this includes class heirarchy. Anarchy is very similar to utopian marxism, just skipping the “dictatorship of the proletariat” part.

    • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Anarchy is the rejection of unjust hierarchies, not all hierarchies. Certainly a parent would have authority over a small child insofar as that’s reasonably justified. Similarly, some expert may be elected to a position where they’re democratically authorized to make specific decisions so we don’t have to vote a thousand times a day about specialized matters.

      On the whole, anarchism just means a lot more democracy.

      • menas@lemmy.wtf
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I think we should not confuse the authority based on oppression, and those based on expertise. However the last one could be justified in front of the community (like the Union), so I would use the word “hierarchical”; the trust we gave in those people is freely agreed between equals.

      • Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Agree with you, depending on the anarchist theory hierarchy disappears more or less but never entirely. It depends on the system chosen and modified by peoples though, so these example may not apply to some anarchist societies, especially the part about the children if you consider what anarchist thinkers wrote and experimented about education