Breaking down walls, tearing down barriers and abolishing borders.

  • tty84@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re confusing anarchism with anomie…

    Anarchism is not the absence of rules, but rules agreed between everyone outside any form of authority.

    • glad_cat@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Rules without authority: impossible to enforce. Rules agreed by everyone: impossible to exist.

      • tty84@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        Once again, you confuse authority with discipline. What is ruled by consensus don’t need to be enforced by authority.

        • Gxost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was leading a work group designing a new software. I tried to reach consensus, so everybody in the group would be satisfied with our decisions. But it didn’t work. Everybody was arguing even on simple questions and didn’t listen to arguments of others. Votings didn’t help too, because the minority was rising the same questions again and again, trying to convince others to join them and then re-vote. And nobody was satisfied. We were wasting time. But when I said that now I only listen to others and make decisions on my own, everybody was ok with that. Our meetings became productive. So, I don’t believe consensus is possible.

          • xachugesh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Consensus is really a function of group size.

            I was in a group, there were 8 members we went back an forth for months to try come to decisions, it was not a great time and nothing was achieved.

            Consensus is probably possible in groups of around 4-5