/siberia/ - Off-topic

I'm not an anarchist but there are so many varieties of anarchism and theories underpinning each one that there isn't gonna be a single answer to the question. I'll say that at least in some varieties of anarchism I know it's argued that the self-interest of most of the members would be to maintain anarchy so this scenario would be unlikely, and anyway you can't usually prevent the dissolution of any political system if most of the people in it agree that it needs to go.

Listen, the moment someone forms an armed gang, it means they aren't anarchists. So when they take over the commune, it's not anarchism, so the failure doesn't count.

Commune's Self Defense Against Reaction

Dont like it? Peep the badge

>>823135
This seems very easy for someone with bad intentions to exploit.

>>823123
my father is a liberal. my mother's a self described anarchist and so is her husband. they're gen x weed smoking drinking types. they have zero theory. any time i ask them a question it's just vaguely you know, fuck cops, fuck the state, fuck capitalism. fuck fuck fuck. very little about how do we get out of it and replace it. they seem almost mad at questions like that. like the very act of asking how do we get shit done is to them "conservative" because it asking them to be realistic, organized, disciplined is what conservatism is to them. that's why they see communism as tankie authortarian conservative suit wearing guys who want to kill their buzz. idk that's just the vibe I get. I know not all anarchists are like that.

Post sewer

> for convenience
There is nothing convenient about systems of oppression.

>>823123
>Can I talk to any of the non-baiter legit anarchists in here?
Yes
>Whenever I ask this question they ignore me: how can an anarchist society maintain itself?
Why couldnt it maintain itself? What kind of dumb ass question is this?
>Does it require that every member (or most) in the anarchist society firmly commit to the bit?
Majority is enough.
>Because the moment most of them agree to support a group of people for legislative/court/law enforcement systems for convenience the anarchist project is joever.
So you invented a strawman anarchism in your mind now it doesnt work.
> How would this be avoided?
Just stop thinking about it bro.

>>823165
Okay and you dont see the same with bad people exploiting liberal capitalism? Imagine if someone elected a zionist pedophile as president who is openly corrupt.

>>823195
Liberal capitalism does not claim to abolish capitalism, unlike anarchism. Are you even trying man

Notice how no one is actually engaging with the post.
How does anarchism fail by asking a single question? Lol.
>but what if there are bad people?
<but there won't be bad people!
>but what if there are bad people?
<but there won't be bad people!
Etc. It's not just political naivety, but fantastical delusion.
Most Communists also have the same pathology.

The tl;dr of it is that they create the exact same oppressive hierarchical institutions as any other society does but it's Anarchist™ because um something something horizontal organization even though in reality there's always someone still giving the orders and someone else following them.

>>823126
>it's argued that the self-interest of most of the members would be to maintain anarchy so this scenario would be unlikely
Even if it would be in their self-interest, people very often don't act in their self-interest, so I don't think that having the whole anarchist project hinge on that would be sustainable.

>you can't usually prevent the dissolution of any political system if most of the people in it agree that it needs to go.
I agree, but there's usually some form of systemic resistance in place to prevent political systems from immediately dissolving. A regular liberal democracy can be very unpopular but still last for decades or centuries, while an unpopular anarchist society would dissolve overnight, it seems.

>>823193
<for convenience
>There is nothing convenient about systems of oppression.
This could be the case, but I don't think most people would agree, which is the important part. Rather than having to constantly be thinking about every single violent offense happening in the commune and about what to do with the perpetrators, I'd rather just pay a group of people to do it for me, provided I agreed with their ethics.

>>823195
Shouldn't socioeconomic systems aspire to be less fragile than liberalism, instead of being just as fragile?

>>823194
<the moment most of them agree to support a group of people […]
>So you invented a strawman anarchism in your mind now it doesnt work.
Would supporting hierarchical systems not be against the fundamental principles of anarchism? How is this a strawman in any way?

>>823124
>>823131
>>823186
i don't understand what you mean

>>823165

it is, but it's way easier to tell away bad intentions from good ones

>>823248
Clearly not given how Trump won two presidential elections without even trying to pretend to be good.

>>823264

you wanted to know about anarchism not about neoliberalism uygha

>>823264
Trump voters wanted someone to make the lives of people they don't like even more miserable and that's exactly what they got.

>>823248
This is retarded, kalashnikov. Sociopaths are known for being able to convincingly present a certain way and then stabbing people in the back.

>>823298
That was only part of what he campaigned on. He also campaigned on no new wars and on a better economy, and we all know how things have turned out.

>>823301

then elect a good psychopath instead of a bad sociopath, duh