• MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      21 hours ago

      The point stands though. Pure Anarchism is a power vacuum. There is no way to achieve a power vacuum, it will be quickly filled — the most basic way it is filled is by dictators and warlords. You want to live in a power vacuum? Ask yourself how you will enforce it and suddenly you’re no longer talking about anarchy.

      • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Ask yourself how you will enforce it and suddenly you’re no longer talking about anarchy.

        this is a no true Scotsman.

        • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          No we’re talking about definitions. You’re advocating for anarchy being a viable state for humankind, I’m saying practically you can’t enforce or defend its existence without turning it in to something that it is not by definition. It is practically impossible to defend a state of anarchy as it will and always has been overpowered by a more organized, hierarchical force.

          • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            20 hours ago

            it will and always has been overpowered by a more organized, hierarchical force.

            you can’t prove this

      • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Pure Anarchism is a power vacuum

        power vacuums are fictions deployed by imperialist forces to justify regime change

        • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          ? No, power vacuums can exist and are quickly filled by any group with a modicum of power. Look at ISIS. The US deposed the Iraqi government. The new government was weak and those with a stockpile of weapons and funding from other interested countries quickly swept in and took control of large swaths of territory. They also took territory in Syria after the Arab Spring put Assad on his back foot, unable to maintain power in the east.

        • count_dongulus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          How did gangs take control of Haiti? How did warlords take control of Somalia? I guess those governments just decided to dissolve and hand over their monopolies on violence to other groups.

          • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            20 hours ago

            I don’t know the particular histories you’re talking about, but I bet it involves private property, prisons, and policing. none of that is anarchy.

            • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              19 hours ago

              Correct. So, what happens when you have, as you say, pure anarchy without rulers and then some folks interested in power notice that you have no organized way to defend yourself? They take the power easily. These people are often warlords. That’s why anarchy is so closely associated with such things, because anarchy is a power vacuum. That vacuum is easily filled. The most rudimentary thing that can fill it are warlords.

              • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                19 hours ago

                power vacuums do not exist in fact. you’re telling a story based on a myth.

                what makes you think a community would not keep the means to defend itself and it’s neighbors?

                • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  You keep saying this “power vacuums do not exist” line, and I’m wondering what you mean by it, because it’s used to refer to a phenomenon that we can observe everywhere, all the time.

                  Do you mean that the situation in which no person or group has the power to control the people and resources in a region has never existed? Because that’s what a power vacuum is: When no person or group has the power to make and enforce a set of rules in a region.

                  The first example that comes to mind of a power vacuum is when the substitute teacher leaves the fifth graders alone for fifteen minutes, and comes back to find the class playing “tag-but-the-floor-is-lava” on the tables. Of course, the fifth graders have an internal hierarchy, so they’ve already established some new norms and rules with some unofficial leaders to bout that have filled the power vacuum left by the teacher when they left the room. Regardless, this serves as a great illustration of the concept of a power vacuum: When the teacher is in the room, they are the centre of power. When they leave, the students take on the role of making and enforcing their own rules, thereby filling the power vacuum created by the absence of the teacher. The short in-between period from when the teacher has left until a new set of rules and enforcement mechanisms has been established is typically referred to as a “power vacuum”.

                  • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    32 minutes ago

                    this is all just storytelling. power vacuums are a story telling device, but they are not, actually, observable, testable phenomenon. they are part of a story that is told. often, this is to justify a particular regime taking power.

                • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  What makes me think that is an anarchist community eschews political organization. There would be no way to arrange a competent defense.