During the Ukrainian Revolution, there were all sorts of gangs that emerged that killed Jews and stuff. What did anarchists do? They killed those pogromists in turn. Under conditions of anarchy, there is no state that has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence to punish those who break the “social contract.” Rather, there is a plurality of violence that various groups can inflict on offenders. If you fuck around, you will find out.
Is this a violent sort of life? Not really. It’s not as if Indigenous or pre-state peoples live in violence all the time. Sure, violence did happen, so what?, violence happens all the time under state societies too. The difference is that without a state, people cannot call on a higher power to coerce so they have to rely on each other to keep each other safe. Besides, the people doing the raping, stealing, and killing in state societies are precisely the people protected by privilege and the state. Under conditions of anarchy, such privileges mean very little.
Anthropology has a lot to teach us on how people dealt with such large-scale endeavors without the state. If there’s conflict, they find a mediator or perhaps hold a meeting between the two groups to hash these things out. Sometimes, two groups would go to war. But anarchy is not merely statelessness, it means a society of consent and collaboration without hierarchy. Previous forms of statelessness may see peoples going to war or exert hierarchy with one another over any sort of disagreement or conflict, but anarchy means means a commitment to figuring out how to settle conflict and disagreements without hierarchy. So yes, anthropology has a lot to teach us on how people dealt with conflict in healthy ways. Sometimes they’d settle conflict in violent ways, but our purpose is to learn from these and do better.
tl;d: how is this done? talk to each other and learn from how people mediated conflict without states.
What’s disturbing is that Fredy Perlman wrote that decades ago.
Finally, a correct answer within the context.
No the hydrogen is not a battery, it is gray hydrogen sourced from fossil gas or coal. This makes the hydrogen still a fossil fuel. Green hydrogen doesn’t have this problem.
Love Seeing Like a State
OOoooh interesting stuff! Thanks for sharing.
Again, abolition includes reform, but its ultimate goal is the revolutionary abolition of the carceral system.
As for definitions, surely you can be smart enough to realize dictionary definitions aren’t the be all end all? Besides, my patience wears thin and I am beginning to believe you’re not here to engage in good faith, so I’m becoming increasingly disinterested in continuing this conversation.
Browsing a small sub hardly gives you mastery over a subject matter. Please do some self-study instead of making bad assumptions.
You’re making a lot of assumptions without doing the work of engagement. You’re literally making stuff up about what abolitionists and anarchists believe. Please instead read something by Interrupting Criminalization or Critical Resistance instead of making stuff up.
Abolition means also the abolition of criminal laws. Criminalization defines who in society are deemed as disposable. After criminality has been abolished, this will not mean that harm and conflict disappear. Rather, abolition means dealing with harm and conflict in a healthy way.
Criminals are created, not born. If we address the root causes of criminality, then criminals disappear. You cannot address the root causes of criminality if you imprison people.
The system that abolitionists want to abolish is the carceral system, an entire system geared towards social control that includes policing, incarceration, surveillance, punishment etc. Some abolitionists are anarchist like myself, so those kinds of abolitionists want to abolish the state and capitalism too.
No, prison abolition means the abolition of all detainment.
No, this community is totally geared towards the abolition of police and prisons. The confusion comes from that abolitionists like myself are in favor of reforming police and prisons in such a way to shrink their size and power until they are ultimately abolished. Although not all reform is made equal. Some reforms merely reinforce the police and prison system instead of delimiting and shrinking it. We are against those reforms.
I don’t think I count but I’ve been trying to push the envelope on social ecology in the climate movements in the Philippines
To me, the meme acknowledges that GOG installers are shared in groups, which is piracy since the other people didn’t pay for it. (That doesn’t mean it’s bad btw.)
To me, the meme acknowledges that GOG installers are shared in groups, which is piracy since the other people didn’t pay for it. (That doesn’t mean it’s bad btw.)
To me, the meme acknowledges that GOG installers are shared in groups, which is piracy since the other people didn’t pay for it. (That doesn’t mean it’s bad btw.)
I think you’re fundamentally misunderstanding that social relationships to harm are fundamentally changed under conditions of anarchy. I apologize for the misunderstanding as writing on obscure forums doesn’t exactly encourage me to write with vigor.
Of course there would be a plurality of violence under conditions of anarchy, but this does not fundamentally mean the rule of vigilantism. Right now, people have been dealing with harm without the state for generations. These are found in criminalized communities like Black and Indigenous people, people who use drugs, people who engage in sex work, etc. These people develop mechanisms by which to deal with harm without the state and oftentimes without engaging in vigilantism. For these people, vigilantism is not a court of first resort but a last resort. Vigilantism puts a target on their back from the state. Instead, they talk it out, develop safety plans, plan boycotts and bans, etc.
Rather than thinking of justice in anarchic terms as vigilantism, think of it in terms of people dealing with harm and conflict in healthy ways.