More important than opposition to the current system is the prefiguration of an anarchic one. So much online discourse is about attacking, a lot less is about building. I drew this to remind myself and others that confronting the state is only a part of the puzzle and building new systems without it is also important.

Licence (as always): CC-0, No rights reserved.

  • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
    15·
    23 days ago

    An essential part of laying groundwork is to live the change.

    • co-op everything you can in your day-to-day: credit unions, buying clubs, cohousing, fuel & groceries (western canadians can join these), tool shares, etc
    • barter networks amongst friends, neighbours, and via classified ads
    • use community facilities and dive back by volunteering
    • mutual aid networks
    • grow some food plants
    • pay it forward
    • Val@lemm.eeOP
      11·
      23 days ago

      This is an anarchist comm. We aren’t masquerading anything. We fight against all injustice: state, class, gender, sexuality. You know. Liberty for everyone equally.

      • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldBanned from community
        1·
        23 days ago

        K. The belief you can do that without community, and while centering self-interest, is classically childish anarchism.

        But the memes here are good usually.

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
          18·
          23 days ago

          I don’t think you understand anarchism or what we mean when we say “without a state”. Hint: it’s the opposite from “without community, and while centering self-interest,”

          • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldBanned from community
            1·
            22 days ago

            I understand how you believe it’ll work. I think it’s naive and unrealistic. Especially as a first system post-capitalism.

          • prole
            1·
            22 days ago

            How would a stateless society enforce contracts?

              • prole
                1·
                22 days ago

                Are you for real? Do you think work will cease to exist? Monetary compensation isn’t the only thing that can be exchanged for work/art/etc.

                We already have all sorts of contracts that don’t involve money directly. Marriage is a contract, and that wouldn’t just cease to exist.

                People are selfish and greedy. There needs to be something to try to prevent and/or punish that. And literal force/violence is the only thing that can ever do it. Without it, there will always be people who abuse it.

                So what happens is the person with the biggest gun/stick/army/etc. wins the dispute. Every time.

                That’s how you end up with feudalism. How come libertarians always need to personally re-learn every mistake and lesson we’ve already learned the hard way? It is literally currently destroying the US government.

                Learn some history and we don’t have to repeat the same mistakes again and again.

                • Val@lemm.eeOP
                  4·
                  22 days ago

                  People aren’t selfish or greedy. People are ambitious and in the current society those people are raised to believe that to be the best you have to be selfish and greedy. They aren’t traits you are born with, they are learned.

                  But anarchy still is the best way to deal with greedy people as any kind of hierarchy will just allow the greedy people to get to the top. Hierarchies don’t punish the greedy, they elevate them to the highest positions in society as those that aren’t concerned with other peoples well being can always find a way to gain authority over them.

                  There needs to be something to try to prevent and/or punish that.

                  Anarchy has that something. You can counter abuse without being abusive yourself. We can build social structures that prevent greed without hierarchy. The solution isn’t to give some people a monopoly on violence because that position will always attract the most violent. It’s to build a social networks that sees problems before they happen and provides support. Punishment isn’t a productive method of preventing harm. It’s vengeance, not prevention.

                  What is currently destroying the US isn’t libertarianism, it’s bad education, mass media manipulation and a bunch of people following orders.

                  Learn some history

                  OK
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Commune
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makhnovshchina

                • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                  2·
                  22 days ago

                  Marriage is a contract, and that wouldn’t just cease to exist.

                  What kind of enforcement would a “marriage contract” need in a moneyless society?

                  People are selfish and greedy. There needs to be something to try to prevent and/or punish that. And literal force/violence is the only thing that can ever do it. Without it, there will always be people who abuse it.

                  Greedy selfish people can’t abuse a system that doesn’t allow accumulation of wealth.

                  Sidenote that this is an anarchist space and while we tolerate such some debate, we don’t have to tolerate your shitty attitude. Check the sidebar.

              • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                1·
                19 days ago

                And literal force/violence is the only thing that can ever do it.

                There’s no rule that says an anarchist society needs to be moneyless.

                • releaseTheTomatoes@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                  2·
                  18 days ago

                  You need to understand that money became much more than a tool facilitate trade. Nowadays it’s become a way of consolidating power and controlling resources, which amplifies inequality. When you say:

                  There’s no rule that says an anarchist society needs to be moneyless.

                  That’s not exactly the full truth. Getting rid of money right this instant would be a logistical nightmare. But there are already so many things we don’t need money for it’s hysterical. Being an anarchist today means you question authority constantly to either deem it legitimate or not. In todays age money is a great tool for you to hoard resources and otherwise wealth. So the question for us is not “How fast can we get rid of money” but rather “What kind of system can we implement in order to make money practically useless.”

                  Edit: In other words, lets say you have 100 Dollars, you decide “I wanna buy some bread.” You stumble upon a commune that eliminated money entirely and traded based on need. You see two people are actively trading bread and fruits… with no profit incentive whatsoever. Just kind of trading because “ehh, I have enough apples for myself, here you go.” Wont that interaction make you completely question those 100 bucks that you planned to use?

            • superkret@feddit.org
              3·
              22 days ago

              The way it worked for millennia in societies without a powerful state –
              by shunning the contract breakers in your community.

              • prole
                1·
                22 days ago

                Just extraordinarily naive.

        • snekmuffin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          10·
          23 days ago

          you might be confusing anarchism, the exact polar opposite of “without community” with the hyper-individualist flavor of american libertarianism

      • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldBanned from community
        1·
        23 days ago

        Yep. Obsession with self-interest, and arrogance to believe they can thrive without community. So childish.

        • Kommeavsted@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          9·
          23 days ago

          Mutual Aid and community are core to the ideology. You’ve either made up your mind before even attempting to learn about something, or you’re trolling.

            • Kommeavsted@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              8·
              22 days ago

              That’s a fine disagreement (necessity of state/arrogance) to have, but don’t try to make up ideas about it being excessively self interested or anti-communal.

              You’re still going to be argued with here but you won’t get a respectful response unless you show you’re acting in good faith.

            • monsieur_hackerman@programming.dev
              3·
              22 days ago

              Because the state does so much for you? Most people (in America at least) don’t have the luxury of the state even giving a passing thought to their well being

              • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldBanned from community
                1·
                22 days ago

                You’re talking about a state controlled by the wealthy. I’m talking about a state controlled by the workers.

    • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      19 days ago

      Libertarianism masquerading as leftism.

      Since when does libertarianism “masquerade” as leftism? You do know that this is literally the original association of the term libertarian, right?