Oh no, Anarchists!

Was the credit cut? Bc Existential Comics really be a classic

Don't know is EC has that signed in the image tbh. I just crossposted in this case.
If I recall correctly, a lot of the comics (at least early ones, I haven't gotten very far) don't have credit on them.
- ah ok, I did not know that
- It shouldn't be. Cutting the credit is not a cool move.
- Not specifically (yet), it's just good practice to credit someones work. Especially when it's such a good (and dare I say based) webcomic series
- It's super shitty. I'm not one to make generalizations, but people who crop out credits probably rape their moms

As much as I abhor the state and wish we live like the state of Cheran (ironic of me to say state in this case, I know), anarchy will only work in a very small group, where everyone knows each other, are like-minded enough to not abuse each other's goodwill, and respect each other's personal boundaries.

So have a lot of small groups
- Free trade and mutual cooperation between collectives, I thought this was considered the standard anarchic model?
- Yes, our massive population and current way of life are not natural tendencies of our species, they are organizational forms put into place by rulers for more effecient exploitation.
- And then what stops one small group from slowly becoming a giant group again?
- Like...? I really miss the point. Do you mean villages or genocide?
- So have a lot of small groups
  Holy shit guys he solved the whole problem. Where should we send the check to?
I also wonder what happens as new generations start to become prominent, they might not have the same ideals as their parents and either move away or change the dynamics of the group.
Yeah, that's not my favorite. I don't really want to rely on people or be part of a close community like that. And I really like having personal property. I probably contribute the bare minimum to society outside of my taxes. Not part of any organizations, don't give to charity. Definitely don't give to the homeless. Don't volunteer. I just want to work and come home to my house with my family and all my stuff. I'd make a terrible anarchist.
- Why do you mention personal property? Anarchism and communism still allow ownership of personal property, but collective ownership of the means of production such as factories and schools. You could do everything you do now in a socialist or anarchist society.
What's the alternative that works?
- That's what we're all trying to figure out.

Anti-anarchist pretty much think

Anarchy = chaos

This is heavily promoted by mainstream media and language

Anarchists are pacifist

Many people seem unable to comprehend how a community might defend itself without a standing military and so assume we must be unwilling to defend ourselves.

Nothing can be accomplished without coercion

Because most of us have grown up within strict hierarchies coerced to do things we don't want, we have trouble imagining any other way.

Everyone is inherently a selfish asshole

This is probably projection in most cases

How do you keep an Anarchic Utopia then? What stops Dickie McDickerson and his thugs from establishing a state on top of you?
Anarchists are pacifist
Will there be downsides?

Anarchy is not by nature disorganized. Lack of hierarchy doesn't mean lack of organization. Probably a well-functioning anarchist organization is better organized than most hierarchical ones.
If friends are not there to defend the group of three, mutual aid is missing. That's why it failed.
- What does a well-functioning anarchist organization look like, though? How does one of any size prevent from fracturing into competing factions over time? If such organizations are limited to tight-knit community scales, I can't see how it's not eventual feudalism with extra steps.
- Hierarchy isn't the opposite of anarchy.
  It's just a type of rule. As in "an-archy", without ruler.
  There's also "synarchy", meaning "joint rule or government by two or more individuals or parties", which I feel is far more what people here are advocating in the name of anarchism.
Who said anarchists and their friends will not defend from outside threats? The Spanish anarchists organized and fought for 3 years against overwhelming odds when they had to.
- Remains to be seen if anarchism can ever win though.
  Statist forces have always triumphed.
- Yeah , but ...
  In Paris we fought and were massacred.
  In Korea/Manchuria we fought and were massacred.
  In Ukraine we fought and were massacred.
  And as you say in Spain we fought, but then we were massacred.
  There's more of course, but you get the idea.
  Something probably should be done differently in the future.
mutual aid, equality or freedom are not doomed to fail: as long as human beings live in societies they will seek cooperation and justice.
- Perhaps like... organised cooperation, even perhaps putting things on paper to make sure what has been agreed upon gets followed through. Maybe even assign some people to do that for the larger society, so everyone doest have to worry about it. I mean, everyone should help each other, so if someone just doesn't anyone on purpose and even takes other's things, they should face some sort of negative consequence, but then we'd need to assign people who verify that someone has broken the rules and some to enforce that the negative consequences actually happen.
  And wow, the anarcho-syndicalist commune now has government, taxes, justice and law enforcement.
  People are by nature cooperative unless fucked over, but I find it weird that the prescriptive meaning of "anarchy" is completely glossed over.
  The type of society I want to live in definitely won't happen without any sort of rules or regulations about at least some things. Otherwise we won't have industry, and I like my toys. We can't manage a good (and advanced) society without good regulation which requires good government.
- as long as human beings live in societies they will seek cooperation and justice.
  You defeated your own position. Humans aren't, nor can be perfecly just nor perfectly cooperative.
- Do you wait your turn in line at the store under the threat of violence? Do you only drive the speed limit because if you didn't you would get pulled over and have your license suspended? Do you give money/food to the homeless despite it being againstl local bylaws that could land you with a fine?
  Enforcement in day to day life is an illusion. People don't need to be forced to "behave". By and large, most of us just do because we want to get on with our day. If there is no social incentive to harm others, for the most part people.wont harm others because we simply have no desire to harm others. There are ways to account for fringe cases that don't require a hierarchical, domineering system
- If it does enforce it, then we’re no longer talking about an anarchy.
  Anarchism is not anti self-defense, and that applies at the community level as well. A group of anarchist isn't obliged to let a selfish person harm them. Self-defense is neither authority nor coercion.
You have a very skewed idea of anarchism. I won't deny the existence of anti-organizational and pacifist anarchist groups but they're not a majority. Social anarchism, anarcho-communism, anarcho-syndicalism, communalism, Marxist autonomism, council communism, neozapatismo, and especifism are all libertarian socialist ideologies that espouse the necessity of organization and self defense. I'm sure I'm missing a few too. You're taking a silly comic as serious commentary on the ideological substance of a deep and diverse body of political theory.
Anarchism is neither inherently pacifist nor disorganized, that's your lack of understanding showing.
The circle A anarchism logo means "order without hierarchy".
I don't think those ideas are doomed to fail. I think the idea of not having a state is doomed to fail.

The answer actually did surprise me!

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-are-you-an-anarchist-the-answer-may-surprise-you

AAAB.

All Anarchists Are Based.

Anarchism wouldn't get that far in the first place lmao

Heck the state

The state (could and idealistically) be the will of the people via proper democratic systems. It's just that right now most aren't that democratic, and unelected corporations have too much influence. (So under capitalism, I do think actual democracy isn't super meaningful)
I think if you want to have a functional civilisation (rather than just small communes, which with today's population is a pipe-dream) you need some kind of taxes, and now we've already arrived back at needing a state.
Collective spending is required for a civilisation, end of story. Anarchy is never going to build continent spanning infrastructure, ever.
Someone trying to accumulate wealth or power is going to ruin it for you. Sold you food with lead in it? Okay, what are ya gonna do about it? At a small, community scale this is easy, at civilisation scale, forget about it. You need some court system.
If you want to go live in a commune, be my guest, that's the only place anarchy can work.

If Putin's and Bezos didn't arise in every society, you wouldn't need a government.

But they always do.

They arise because they capture that state
- They arise because there will always be a small percentage of humans who are sociopaths. Simplified, this means they are willing to harm others, not just because they are starving and NEED to harm someone to get their basic needs met (which I'd argue most people are capable of), but even to take things they don't actually need. Since most people are not willing to hurt others to take things they don't actually need (usually even willing to bend rather than fight), sociopaths have a leg up on the rest of us. They were able to rise to power way back when the first cities were being built, and have maintained a sociopathic society ever since. Sociopathic tendencies are lauded amongst the corporate elites, and without them it is unlikely one will make it in the corporate world.
- They arise because the capture that economy. A state is not required to capture an economy. However, a state is required to have any hope of even remotely controlling the people controlling the economy.

Ah yes the comic that deprogrammed me on anarchism

This is so cringe.

I don't see how anyone would be safe from thieves in anarchy.

Stealing, when it is done by most regular people is out of desperation. Decomodification of things necessary to live, and change in the socioeconomic system from a hierarchical one to a cooperative one would very likely lead to reduction in such crimes.
I have a gun. (/s)
You are misunderstanding why people become thieves in the first place, and how comparatively uncommon pure thievery is. The majority of theft is legal and is done in the name of capitalist profiteering. Not that break ins don't happen, nor that everyone will be a good person and accept a society of mutual aid.
Genuine theft will still occur. The consequences of something being stolen would not be the same within an anarchist society built on mutual aid. It is much easier to recover from theft when shelter, food, water, are all guaranteed things that you don't have to fret over. So the consequences will largely be interpersonal, grudges and disputes between people over less consequential things like valuables of some particular nature.
I am not of the opinion that violence of the community need be used on such a situation either. We aren't the police for Christ's sake. We can actually settle disputes in a proactive way that attempts to rectify the situation that precipitated the theft (maybe someone needs mental health help, maybe there are interpersonal issues) without kicking the shit out of anyone.
Violent crimes can be handled however the community sees fit. But things like theft or destroying someone's clothes should be handled proactively to ensure lasting solutions for everyone involved. Violence is a pretty bad deterrent for this kind of behavior.
The state doesn't keep you safe from thieves now. The police are a reactionary force that shows up after you've been robbed and then do nothing to help you. The most you get is a police report to refer your insurance company to, if your stolen belongings were insured.
- A very real risk of punishment by the state if you happen to get caught is what prevents theft. Your argument conveniently left that important part out and presented a straw man argument.
  The rest of these comments talk about unenforced theft like white collar crimes and other class war-like theft. Which just reinforces the idea that only state-executed enforcement of law is actually any good at preventing theft.
No rulers doesn't mean no rules
- Who has authority to enforce those rules? If no one, then how do you resolve disputes in a civil, yet binding fashion?
https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionI.html#seci58
- So basically mob-justice.
  Because witch hunts have never gone wrong and were always justified.
  "This man loves other men, that's weird, let's kill him." - apparently no one ever
  Also relevant meme:
Theivery is a result of material needs unfulfilled, not some random genetic drive to go stealing.
- Some people are born evil. More than most of us would care to think too hard about.
  "The greatest crimes are not those committed for the sake of necessity but those committed for the sake of superfluity. One does not become a tyrant to avoid exposure to the cold." -- Aristotle
You are free to steal. And the rest of the community is free to beat the shit out of you.
- If that's how it works, then a stable anarchist society is impossible. The first asshole that comes along with a bigger gun than everyone else will have it right back to a dictatorship.
- This, but much more importantly - when everyone's needs are met, and there is no hierarchy to try and get to the top of at the expense of others, people will have no reason to do shit like steal in the first place.
- Thats why were actually in a “anarchy always has been” meme.
  We are free to ignore the law and to object any direct order.
  We are free to join a police force and protect the state, to join a police force and kill a civilian, free to take a firearm and kill a police officer, free to be killed by a police officer
  We are free to organize institutions and support those.
  You are free to join a line of thinking which brings you to a state of servitude.
  You are free to comply, others are free to hurt you based on but also regardless of what you do.
  Anarchy always has been, always will be.
  Sooner we realize how inevitable it is the quicker we can overcome the hurdle and to accept that: Only by also helping others can we truly better ourselves.
A thief is safer under a state because the state can punish those who defend themselves. The point of the state is to be the only ones able to dispense justice.
If someone stole from me, me or my community can dispense justice without fear of the state. Communities tend to not fuck with each other too much lest they start battles, which nobody wants. Humans lived for hundreds of thousands of years without states.
- The age of tribes was fucking brutal. They attacked and extinguished each other regularly.
- Ah, so fair process only lynch mops? Great.
Anarchism is the result of controlled opposition brainworms that the bourgeoisie spread to prevent socialism from taking hold
Because everybody knows, anarchism is complete dog shit
Also, modern age anarchists suspiciously rant more about "red fash" than they ever stand up to actual fascism
Fuck them lol

I doubt that. I think the pushback starts when you threaten somebody's cash flow. The women thing is a red herring.

So... as soon as the society based on mutual aid starts?
Speaking entirely seriously, the reduction of societal relations in a capitalist economy to purely or even primarily material concerns conceals and denies the very real and very prominent place personal and cultural biases have. Oftentimes materially damaging movements are ignored until they begin to threaten cultural norms.

I thought the last sentence was "Rich you are"

BUT... think about the PROOOfits

narodnics joined the chat

I don't get it
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narodniks
- It's supposed to be funny bc the failed idealism of the Narodniks later lead to the individual terrorist approach of the "Narodnaya Volya" ("Peoples Will")
  (this is not meant to be a jab at anarchists btw, just thought it was midly relevant and funny/ironic)

What is the best example of something built by anarchists?

For the sake of curiosity I'd leave this quite broad. Buildings, institutions, inventions, art. What's the showcase example of what anarchy has created for us?

40 hour work week. 8 hour day.
- I thought credit for both of those usually goes to unions. Which anarchists or groups of anarchists made the most significant contributions to the 40 hour work week or 8 hour days?
  How did a philosophy of minimized government involvement contribute to the regulations and enforcement mechanisms around our labor laws?
- That'd be unions. I can't think of anything less anarchy-y.
much of the basic technique in photography and film? not being a chattel slave? OSHA? there not being a cop city in atlanta just yet? several major art movements; really most of them at least since radio became a thing? the personal computer? FOSS(what about Lemmy, originally? was that anarchists?)? a major chunk of the muscle behind the positive parts of the early internet and trying to keep it free? modern shadow archives? most (by a very small very arguable margin) of the Russian revolution, before the Bolsheviks killed all the communists? organized labor? curry burritos? LOTR? the entire genre of science fiction?

https://youtu.be/mBNi1XGirHg?si=hvkxB_pJ4kdH4F2j

Next stage:

Let’s think of fun comparison for a second. Mods/admins are government, judges and police at the same time. This is equivalent of an authoritarian regime. Now if the mods would be elected by users that would be a democracy. Then if there would be no mods - there we have - anarchism.

In authoritarian regime views of government dictate everything. In democracy people decide who will dictate a lot with various safe guards. In anarchy people directly decide what views are popular and what is a crime, sometimes by groupthink.

What it tells me is that among many anarchists groups some will be absolutely terrible place you wouldn’t want to be in for even a second and some will be amazing but it isn’t a rule but it depends on the people that make up the given group. Obviously if you are POC you would hardly want to be in a racist community, I mean they would probably kill you on sight with their views being very white centered to say the least. So you keep going to find your community assuming you luckily got away. Then you meet community of religious gun freaks flat earthers that you may want to skip as well. Finally you find your dream group but it was raided by some barbarians

Let’s think of fun comparison for a second. Mods/admins are government, judges and police at the same time. This is equivalent of an authoritarian regime. Now if the mods would be elected by users that would be a democracy. Then if there would be no mods - there we have - anarchism.
That's not what anarchism is. I suggest you read first about what you're trying to refute
- Do you have a pdf somewhere by chance, it’s really funky formatted for a phone at least

How Anarchists see themselves vs the actual result of Anarchy.

oh no protesting against institutional racism and murder??
- By turning cities into slums and making a militia police force that guns down innocent civilians anyway? Yay anarchy.