WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

694

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt (edited )

Anarchy is a state of things first and foremost

It's the state of "things" before the establishment of any given social order, or after its collapse

In a way it's the natural "state of things"

Otherwise, within any given social order, anarch-ism, is a means to bring down the said social order, in order to fill the void/power vacuum with a new type of social order once the collapse happened

When the said social order/system, exists only for the sake a tiny fraction of the population, at the expense of the vast majority, anarchism tends to become de facto the political leaning everybody ends up agreeing upon to some extent; bring the shit down BAMN first, in a nutshell, and "we'll discuss what order should take place/prevail... After shit is brought down". A that point you have revolution essentially

Mad max is pretty much what anarchy looks like practically speaking, on a day to day basis

You need order for commerce to take place.... So anarcho capitalism...

Take singapore, it's ranked second regarding economic freedom, worldwide

And it's a dictatorship, it's not a perpetual mess/anarchy

[–] 0 pt

I disagree with your vision of what anarchy has to look like. But i agree with everything else you say.

[–] 1 pt

It's not what it "has to", it's what it is as far as I know

I mean, show me one example of nationwide anarchy, that isn't an abject mess in all possible ways

[–] 0 pt

Yeah thats the thing. There are no examples of effective anarchist societies that ive seen. Im still fascinated by the idea, and i hold it as a utopian ideal.