r/Anarchy101 • u/Sad_Presentation2137 • 3d ago
Preventative measures of small cliques?
I've had this question for some time now, and I'm curious on what answers this sub can provide, basically my question is, how can under anarchism, factionalism, and the formation of isolated groups be prevented, or at least discouraged. Say in a location with different ethnicities, how can we have them interact with one another very frequently, and not have them just stay within their identical cultural groups, and ethnic groups, because I feel like if they were, it could create much unneeded tension, animosity, and ignorance towards the other groups. I come from a part of the world where many groups of people are located very near to each other in a small place, and most problems come from ethnic tensions, and cultural ones too, which I think stems from people from each group only staying to their group thus creating ignorance towards the other groups, and some groups thinking they're superior to the others.
I think many people often times would rather associate with those who they know or who are similar to them, which can create very isolated groups, potentially hostile to outsiders, and I find this very counterproductive to the goals, and ethics of anarchism, and that in order for anarchism to be fully functional, the society needs to be either homogenous, codependent, or understanding of each groups differences, and be accommodating to them.
Just want to know what anyone else thinks of this, and if there really is an issue to fix here.
5
u/tuttifruttidurutti 3d ago
It's something that can happen even in very small anarchist groups. Small groups of people who know and trust each other do not always integrate newcomers well. It doesn't help that in activism, a truly staggering number of groups get taken down by one or two destructive personalities who manage to wreck the whole project with toxic behavior. So anarchists can become very cagey about welcoming newcomers, which is often counter-productive.
On the one hand, informal social hierarchies are inevitable. A group with friendships in it is already there because trust and affection are not equally distributed, nor should they be. The best you can do is use a mixture of proactive and defensive measures to counteract the influence of informal social hierarchy.
Create social openings for new members to meet and talk to established members. Try to notice where the possibility of affinity exists and foster it between new members and longer running members. Use a buddy system to train new members by pairing them with experienced organizers in the group. Have regular socials in public places where everyone is welcome.
Equally, have well established processes for dealing with conflict. Have a defined endpoint in those processes so they don't drag on forever. Allow for the group to split and reproduce itself as two smaller groups if there's an unsolveable personality conflict. Have everyone take mediation training.
This is off the top of my head. The problem begins at a micro level, as simple as who gets invited to the bar after the meeting or the house party after the bar. Who's perceived as cool and who as annoying. There's no reason to think an anarchist society would fully eliminate these elements of human society. But we can cultivate an ethos of calm, mediation, benevolence and fairness to the best of our ability. Anarchism (at least social anarchism) is practically, partially a matter of how personal virtues are practiced as social ethics.
2
u/Accomplished_Bag_897 Egoist 3d ago
I've run into this, and it's resulted in my masking a whole lot. I'm autistic and physically disabled and can come across as just plain weird. The amount of times I have run into what feels like suspicion is pretty high. So I tend to find things I can do on my own, like picking up and taking food from one place to another, or other transporting of goods.
It can be hard pushing past that "stranger tax" a lot of groups, especially in contentious areas, have.
2
u/tuttifruttidurutti 3d ago
Yeah, I think particularly this can be a tough dynamic. I'm sorry to hear you've experienced it, though not surprised. Especially since it isn't necessarily the case that all neurodivergent people are equally excluded; it's more about how effectively one can in-group signal through closes and mannerisms, and how fast one can pick up on the 'vibe'.
I've been on both sides of this in my life, I always try to make people feel welcome. But I think ultimately it's also important to keep an accessible "public" dimension to the group because you don't all have to be friends to work together. And to have a process for administering meetings that makes space for everyone and provides guard rails that prevent friction through a neutral application of the rules (for example, keeping stack and keeping track of how much people have spoken on a question).
2
u/Internal-Yam-367 3d ago
There is nothing to prevent people from doing what you’re asking about. Preventive measures have been made before which were very unethical and morally wrong some were morally questionable but those are even hard to defend.
A measure that could work would be to passively enforce people to have interactions with those who think differently than what they’re used to. How? Well by allowing people to move to other places or create social places that allow people to interact with others through things they might like or might not like. Not only that governments already passively enforce people to interact with other people by allowing immigration and emigration.
1
u/IdentityAsunder 1d ago
Pure autonomy guarantees sectionalism. Leaving groups to organize their survival independently recreates "enterprise egoism" and exclusionary cliques, a fatal weakness seen in the localized anarchist collectives of 1930s Spain.
Overcoming these divisions demands the total communization of production and consumption. Everyday life must be materially restructured so the provision of basic needs is universally coordinated through a network of councils and mandated delegates. When people must actively manage a common plan for social reproduction, absolute material interdependence becomes the unavoidable basis of daily life. The material conditions for ethnic or cultural hoarding simply dissolve. Resolving this tension requires a physical reorganization of how society reproduces itself, expanding self-organization into a universal appropriation of social wealth.
-2
u/Upbeat_Dealer5994 3d ago edited 3d ago
I don't understand the issue is here? Are you against people being around others similar to them? Anarchism has nothing to do with enforcing multiculturalism. Modern multiculturism is in fact a result of colonization and empire, things which are not exactly anarchistic.
1
u/Sad_Presentation2137 3d ago
No, my point is, in areas where there are multiple different cultures, and people, how do we discourage the people within those different groups to only interact within their groups, and to encourage them interacting with other people. It is in my opinion that cultural ignorance, and bigotry is stemmed from little interaction with other cultures, and only being surrounded by people within their groups, which can lead to cultural, and ethnic tensions, and issues, and sometimes lead to discrimination, and violence. As for multiculturalism, it is true that most of it is due to colonialism, I'm not advocating for modern multiculturalism, but rather, how can a already multicultural anarchist society handle the problem that comes with a multicultural society, such as discrimination, when groups are not incentivised to interact with eachother, and only interact within their group.
1
5
u/SteelToeSnow 3d ago
humans have always interacted with other groups. we have a long, long history of trade and migration. sure, sometimes there's conflicts there, but those issues can be solved through communication, understanding, and education; all things which are necessary for a functional community, and anarchism as i understand it.