• Zephyr@sh.itjust.works
    6·
    13 hours ago

    The world is complex and multifaceted. We can’t even understand or describe reality in its fullest. Everyone including myself are just operating on an extremely small and reductive version of what we think the world is.

  • Tiger666@lemmy.ca
    9·
    17 hours ago

    I can solve every issue right now but I need complete dictatorship to do it.

    Let me know when you guys are ready.

  • Tiral@lemmy.world
    5·
    17 hours ago

    Pretty much how religion works. Oh you don’t have 4k video and a by the nano second description of the big bang? It’s clearly in my magical book, a fictional being that has zero actual basis in reality made it. Much more plausible.

  • pleiades@lemmy.ml
    8·
    1 day ago

    We’d already have a revolution by now if the time anarchists and MLs spend strawmanning each other was put to good use

    • DeepDown@leminal.spaceOP
      3·
      12 hours ago

      Pretty sure that people who do debate theatrics on the internet just aren’t people who would ever step up irl. That’s why the beef happens here, it’s to relieve a certain anxiety

  • DeepRoots@lemmy.world
    121·
    1 day ago

    I mean, I usually just ask how we protect people dependent on extremely complicated global supply chains to survive for medicine or things like glasses.

    Pure anarchy can’t work and is very ablest. Dgmw fuck capitalism

  • whereitsat@lemmy.zip
    241·
    2 days ago

    i asked a capitalist to feed me when i was hungry and he laughed and told me to get a job. i replied, ‘i applied to 200 jobs in the last year’ and this smug expression settled on his face and he said, ‘try harder, fuckass.’

  • solidheron@sh.itjust.works
    15·
    2 days ago

    Conservatives used to make this argument about any policies they don’t like and oddly not make the argument for policies they do like.

    You can just say “I’m solving more problems than you” and watch them get on the defense

  • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.worldEnglish
    596·
    2 days ago

    Okay, we just solve them one at a time using experimentation enabled by decentralization. Communities pick what works and discard what doesn’t, without a higher power dictating inefficiencies.

    Boom. Done. Next question.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      3·
      17 hours ago

      How is that “boom done”?

      Sounds like it would be an excruciatingly long and possibly neverending process.

      • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        12 hours ago

        Well duh.

        We’re dealing with humans here. It’s going to be an excruciating, unrewarding, frustrating, and usually violent process no matter how we do it.

    • GraniteM@lemmy.world
      223·
      2 days ago

      In 1999, when the Cape Hatteras lighthouse was in danger of collapsing into the sea, it was determined that it needed to be moved inland. The community was outraged, lawsuits and votes followed, and the local community determined that they did not want the lighthouse moved. The Army Corps of Engineers declared that the community of Hatteras was not in a position to win a war against the ocean, asserted the Federal Government’s control over the lighthouse, and moved it anyway.

      The move was a huge success. The lighthouse is now safe from collapsing into the ocean, despite the efforts of the local community.

      I’m not saying submitting to a higher power (in this case a higher level of expertise) is always better… but sometimes it is.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        139·
        2 days ago

        Local communities are so much better than higher power that you needed to stretch for anecdotal evidence from the 20th century.

        More lighthouses are being destroyed by the climate change that the Army defends and creates directly.

        Gee thanks for the government, without it one lighthouse might have collapsed eventually.

        • Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org
          6·
          15 hours ago

          But if in one community you don’t have anyone that has a sufficient level of expertise for some area or another, that might lead it to collapse into pseudoscience and bad decisions. I don’t mean that you need a central authority, but you for sure need local authorities in X or Y question inside every cell of the federation.

          • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.netEnglish
            5·
            1 day ago

            A concentrated community of Right-wing libertarians/Anarcho-capitalists are destined to destroy themselves if they attain any sort of power, as they follow the Ayn Rand school of selfishness to the extreme. Grafton, NH isn’t far off from how Bioshock explored the same ideas and how it would lead to societal collapse.

            left wing libertarainism/Anarchism, on the other hand, is mainly collectivist, and we have well documented examples of that political theory working extremely well when put into practice.

            1936 Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War organized an Anarchist society with over 3 million participants, and they documented much of how exactly they ran it, right down to how they kept the electric trams for public transport going (there is a fantastic book embedded at the bottom of that article, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution by Gaston Leval, which offers more details on other aspects of how they operated that society).

            It’s a fantastic historical event we can learn from and build upon.

          • expr@programming.dev
            123·
            2 days ago

            Libertarians aren’t the brightest bunch to begin with, but regardless, saying “look at this community that was wrong” in response to people wanting to remove central authority is not really an argument against the idea.

            The entire point is that people are free to govern themselves. Governing well is up to the local communities. Some would do better than others, certainly. But with time, people would discover what works and what doesn’t. They would make mistakes like these and learn from the natural consequences of their actions. It’s imperfect because humans are imperfect.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.worldEnglish
          102·
          2 days ago

          And a community would decide to prevent climate change more than a country would because…?

            • Feathercrown@lemmy.worldEnglish
              82·
              2 days ago

              Uh huh. You didn’t answer the question. My town can’t even successfully vote to keep the water district, there is no way we’d ban CFCs (let alone have done the necessary research) or fossil fuels. Everything you hate about the people of this country is because of the people who live in every town. It’s the same people.

              • explodicle@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                47·
                2 days ago

                I did answer the question. Now you’re moving the goalposts from lighthouses destroyed, as per the meme.

        • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          3·
          1 day ago

          Eh, if by very recently you mean the last 12,000 years. From when the agricultural revolution started, assholes with armies started existing and exploiting people working the land.

          It’s the near 100% conquest of the planet by states, and the globalization of the power of companies that is more recent. It’s the powerful trying to fully own everything, that is closer to 300 years old.

          • some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world
            2·
            1 day ago

            Was thinking on an evolutionary timescale with H. Sapiens first emerging 300,000 years ago.

            So yeah, maybe not “very recently” as the phrase would be commonly understood, but surely “relatively recently” if “humans existing” is the frame of reference.

    • Cypress@lemmy.zipEnglish
      9·
      2 days ago

      This is anarcho-syndicalism, right? It sounds better and better every time I hear about it!

      Edit: wait i think i misread you

      I thought you said it was something like small organized communities each individually attempting to solve one problem at a time democratically and then everyone adopting the methods that work.

    • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
      33·
      1 day ago

      that’s why we have a thriving community right next to one that’s ripping out its publicly managed topiary every decade. it’s not “experimantation enabled by decentralization”, it’s grift and public policy failure

    • weps@lemmy.world
      38·
      2 days ago

      what definitively works is my community conquering your community

      thanks for all the stuff, and the slaves

  • Cypress@lemmy.zipEnglish
    23·
    2 days ago

    I like the way anarcho-syndicalism only needs to solve the problems of the individual “syndicate” in question. It’s a shame culture has corrupted the word “syndicate” into only being used when referring to “criminal syndicates”, as if any private club or organized community weren’t also syndicates despite not being criminal in nature. I would have used political parties as an example but the Democrat and Rape Pedo Klan parties absolutely most certainly ARE criminal syndicates…

  • Sanctus@anarchist.nexusEnglish
    318·
    2 days ago

    Typing anything into these fucken forums with my instance name and seeing the .worlders respond.

    • g0d0fm15ch13f@lemmy.worldEnglish
      44·
      2 days ago

      Hey man some of us worlders are anarchists too. We just didn’t understand that each server has its own culture when signing up and just assumed bigger = more uptime

    • DeepDown@leminal.spaceOP
      8·
      2 days ago

      My impression was world seems to be the landing place in fediverse from the wider internet. Is there an underlying demographic there I’m not seeing?

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@anarchist.nexusEnglish
        151·
        2 days ago

        My impression was world seems to be the landing place in fediverse from the wider internet.

        It is, but…

        Is there an underlying demographic there I’m not seeing?

        Liberal capitalists. In particular, the .world admins…kinda hate Anarchist Nexus and the rest of the Anarchist Flotilla (dbzer0 and quokk.au), because some of our people are too fucking based militantly anti-Zionist. We almost got defederated 😆

          • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@anarchist.nexusEnglish
            5·
            2 days ago

            Yeah I don’t see that many leminal.space users running around, so I don’t have much of an impression of them. Also I do try not to put too much stock in a person’s instance. Like there are definitely exceptions (e.g. maga.place), but even for like .worlders I know there are a few anarchists running around.

            • Aqivex@fedinsfw.appEnglish
              2·
              2 days ago

              Cannot take too seriously, comrades. Cannot forget the concept and reason for silly praxis.

              If you make a home in other silly adjacent instances that generally mind their own business and spread the theory differently, neither the liberal capitalist nor the other natural enemy of an anarchist tends too notice much.

              Both can’t read too well, only quote.

      • real_squids@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        111·
        2 days ago

        huh? they’re saying .world users don’t like anarchists, where the hell did you see gatekeeping?

        • jesusactuallyhateshorses@sh.itjust.works
          47·
          2 days ago

          Typing anything into these fucken forums with my instance name and seeing the .worlders respond.

          You see that as them saying .world users don’t like anarchists. I see it as them saying .world users are all anti-anarchy.

          Saying “.worlders” doesn’t imply “some”, “many” or “most”. It implies all.

          Lemmy.world is the largest instance. It’s often the default when you sign up. By saying it the way they did, OP is discouraging and limiting discourse regarding anarchy. By painting the entire instance with the same brush OP is effectively gate keeping anarchy.

          • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@anarchist.nexusEnglish
            5·
            2 days ago

            So then instead of “seeing the .worlders respond”, would you take “seeing many of the .worlders respond”? Because that’s…kind of a small change, really the only sensible reading. And it certainly doesn’t deserve the vitriol.

            And even if we did assume the (false) argument that literally all .worlders are anti-anarchist…you can just sign up for an account on almost any other instance, and then by the same (false) logic you’re allowed to be an anarchist again. So even under such a reading, it’s barely gatekeeping at all.

            • jesusactuallyhateshorses@sh.itjust.works
              14·
              2 days ago

              So then instead of “seeing the .worlders respond”, would you take “seeing many of the .worlders respond”? Because that’s…kind of a small change, really the only sensible reading.

              That’s a massive change. “Many” and “All” aren’t interchangeable.

              “Many” Americans voted for Trump.

              “All” Americans voted for Trump.

              “Many” anarchists describe themselves as such because they are edgelords, not anarchists.

              “All” anarchists describe themselves as such because they are edgelords, not anarchists.

              Big difference.

              As for vitrol, read the tone of OPs post before you judge mine.

              Edit: OP, a few minutes ago.

              Edgelord.

              • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@anarchist.nexusEnglish
                8·
                2 days ago

                As for vitrol, read the tone of OPs post before you judge mine.

                I literally did, it’s one single sentence. You escalated the vitriol. Sanctus’s vitriol was against an instance, i.e. impersonal; yours was personal.

                “Many” and “All” aren’t interchangeable.

                In this context…they are. The most active and vocal users on .world, in particular the admin team, are anti-anarchist. That doesn’t mean that anarchist sympathizers and even anarchists don’t exist at all on .world, but it is generically true that if you say anarchist stuff in a .world community, in particular stuff that directly challenges the assumptions of liberal capitalist ideology, you will get downvoted and flamed for your views, primarily by .world liberals.

                Said differently: the dominant perspective on lemmy.world is an openly anti-anarchist social liberalism.

                However, most people aren’t annoying pedants like me and don’t like writing or reading huge bricks of text. This is an informal online forum, doubly so as a shitposting community; it is reasonable and expected for you to be able to sensibly fill in the details. And if you wanted to disagree with his point, you really could have stated your point without being mean to Sanctus. (You still can, since you can edit your post and apologize for coming on too strong. I’ve done that before.)

                And really, we’re supposed to be comrades here. Not to say that we can never ever be contentious, but we really don’t need to be screaming at each other if it can be avoided.

                Edit: OP, a few minutes ago.

                You’re reading way too much into an off-handed comment. But since I’m an annoying pedant 😁: he said:

                I mainly chose this instance cause @anarchist.nexus sounds sicc as fucc

                He’s saying that he chose this instance because it sounds cool. Not his beliefs. And there’s no reason why an edgelord cannot be an anarchist. And I would argue that at least some degree of contentiousness, i.e. “edgelord behavior”, is necessary (but insufficient on its own) to be an effective anarchist, for the simple reason that capitalism has made discussion about capitalism taboo.