Posting to 'grad because I don’t know where that’d belong on 'bear. I hope it’s OK!

I genuinely cannot see how anarchism could work large scale, but there are anarchist spaces: anarchist communes. I think after a leftist revolution the world would be generally communist, but there would be independent anarchist communes. I think that’d be a true way anarchists and communists could coexist in reality. Alongside one another but not forced to abandon their political stances.

  • taiphlosion@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Yeah, a redundant term that doesn’t make any sense. I used to be one till I found out they have no answer for deconstructing and preventing racism.

    • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Any model for an anarchist society without an answer to how to dismantle and prevent racism - or any other kind of oppression of a minority - is not, in my view, anarchist. Anarchism requires the elimination of unjustified hierarchies. If racism exists, then a race hierarchy exists, which is inherently unjustified.

      How that is achieved is a very different matter, and there’s a wide variety of thought on the subject and lots of differing opinions.

      Personally I think the starting point has to be that our society is completely intolerant of anything which elevates or denigrates people based on race, gender identity, disability, sexual orientation, spiritual belief, etc. so long as their beliefs do not promote any other kind of intolerance.

      As for how this is implemented, again there’s great diversity of thought, but in general I feel like the process should look something like education, then arbitration, then banishment. Obviously, in extreme cases of hate speech or for particularly hateful examples some steps might be skipped or abridged, I don’t think a one-system-fits-all solution can be designed or is even desirable.

      An absence of inherent detail for how everything would be implemented is a feature, and not a flaw, of anarchism IMO, because it’s helpful that questions like this are resolved by consensus, not by decree or dogma. Anarchism is all about building a cohesive, peaceful society, not about enforcing our personal will on others.

      For example, I have never experienced racism, so it would be totally foolish and ignorant of me to think that I have all the answers for how to solve it.

      • taiphlosion@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        For example, I have never experienced racism, so it would be totally foolish and ignorant of me to think that I have all the answers for how to solve it.

        And case closed.

            • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              You: Anarchism doesn’t have any answers!

              Me: Anarchism isn’t about “having answers”, it’s about FINDING answers as a collective

              You: 😏 Yea exactly you got no answers dumbass 😏

              • diegeticscream[all]🔻@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                You: Anarchism doesn’t have any answers!

                Me: Anarchism isn’t about “having answers”, it’s about FINDING answers as a collective

                You: 😏 Yea exactly you got no answers dumbass 😏.

                In the 200+ years anarchism has existed, has that method of “finding answers” proved effective?

                When?

                /* ok, 159 years. The First International was 1864.