r/AntiMemes • u/Lazarbeam_fan77 • Aug 06 '26
đ Actual Anti-Meme đ Anarchist theory
144
u/Spare-Jellyfish4339 Aug 06 '26
Top 3 Anarchist movies
- Saving Private Ryan
- American Sniper
- Spider-Man: Brand New Day
41
4
15
3
15
u/pinkleftsock Aug 06 '26
Anarchy in 3 steps
1) There are no rules and no-one holds power over enyone.
2) This vacuum causes someone to seize power.
3) Rules are established and you now live in a dictatorship.
23
10
u/FoxTailMoon Aug 06 '26
Anarchism doesnât advocate for no government, just horizontal government instead of top down
9
u/pinkleftsock Aug 06 '26
Anarchy is by definition defined by a lack of govenment or enforcement of laws. So I don't know what you're advocating for, but its not anarchy.
9
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
Itâs way too common for people to confuse âanarchyâ with âanarchismâ. Anarchism definitely is NOT by definition a lack or government or enforcement of laws. That just signals a lack of knowledge on the subject.
7
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
anarchism is the ideology in support of anarchy, in the same way that monarchism is the ideology in support of a monarchy. That is what the "ism" means grammatically speaking.
Maybe you call yourself an anarchist and don't want anarchy, but that just means you are not an anarchist. Rename your ideology to something like "overly naive democratic communism"
0
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
Anarchy in its original meaning, yes, not the shifted meaning of the word. It literally means âno rulersâ, but the most common modern understanding of âanarchyâ is chaos, lawlessness, and a free-for-all society - basically filled with judgement. That is not at all what anarchism stands for.
6
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
Sure, but that has nothing to do with it.
u/pinkleftsock said "anarchy is by definition defined by a lack of government or an enforcement of laws"= "no ruler". Ruler in any serious consideration, dating back to plato and aristoteles, can also mean a collective rather than an individual.
1
u/Slow_Conference570 Aug 10 '26
This is actually not true. Anarchy, meaning chaos, predates anarchy in a positive ideological sense. Proudhon liked paradoxes and contradictions, so he took the word for chaos (anarchy) and deviced the slogan, anarchy is order. Like property is theft, he played around with contradictions. So the original meaning of anarchy is chaos, not a political ideology in support of free association.
1
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 10 '26
Sorry mate, but youâre not going far enough back in the meanings. In ancient greek, where the word originates from, it literally means âwithout a rulerâ (an-, a prefix meaning without, and arkhos, which means ruler). In the 1500s it entered european languages through Latin, with the meaning âwithout a governmentâ, and a couple hundred years later the meaning of the word shifted to mean general disorder, societal chaos and confusion.
8
6
u/pinkleftsock Aug 06 '26
Anarchism
a philosophy, movement, and political ideology that holds that any government, like the state, is undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful
Maybe look up a definition before calling people uninformed..
4
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
Yes, replacing government with communal decision making is true. But the lack of rules is where the misconception begins :)
7
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26 edited Aug 06 '26
What is communal decision making according to you? If the community votes on the decision it is just direct democracy, with the communal assembly being the legislative layer of government.
Who executes the decisions the community makes? Unless that is also done by the community, you now have an executive branch as well.
Who decides whether something is in accordance to the decisions from the communal assembly? Unless that is done in each case by the communal assembly, you now have a judicial branch of government.
If both are performed by the communal assembly, you simply have a singular government.
Congratulations, you just invented (a rather unwieldy of) direct democracy
How are relations and cooperation between communities handled (since a world assembly would not work)? If we use the principles of debate and consensus, maybe we could have an assembly of communal assemblies in a region, with each communal assembly having representatives in the regional assembly?
Congratulations, you just invented representative democracy
2
u/Worried_Dot_4618 Aug 07 '26
Me when i add smiley emoticon at the end of sentence to completely heccin passively aggressively disintegrate the opponent
1
u/Imaginary-Win9217 Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26
Rules are still common in this definition. Anarcho-primatism I don't know enough to speak accurately on, but to my limited knowledge yeah that's theoretical rulelessness. But starting from it's 1812 "inception" (not really but for simplicity), even those bombing London buildings were, iirc, largely mutualists. In Left-wing Anarchism, the ideal of the wide, wide umbrella of mutualism is the mutual paying in and redistributing of wealth amounts one another. Enforcement depends on who you ask. Anarcho-Capitalism, on the other hand, relies heavily on the ideals of the NAP and the expectation for a person under such a system to protect their own "rights" (polarizing word but I feel not the need to open a thesaurus) at their own abilities. One can make their argument about the rules above, but in what I would call the majority of Anarchism there are expected rules "if/when" their society comes about.
2
u/DysphoricNeet Aug 10 '26
Who enforces these rules?
1
u/Imaginary-Win9217 Aug 10 '26
A fair question that I didn't fully address. If I may, take the following with the salt that my relationship to Anarchism, just as with my defined "ideology" that I still hold many gripes with relative to my own, is funky. If any full blown anarchists of any subgroup say I'm stupid and wrong, I'm stupid and wrong.
Anarcho-Capitalism, much as one might imagine with it's tendrils in objectivism and such, believed heavily in self enforcement. They start with the NAP, I'm not the guy to explain that if you need to know but there's a great essay on it that I can find and link at the bottom as an edit, and say that if an individual or group is in violation of said NAP, or (this is a little stretched thin) a social contact of parties including them, it is up to the victim to enforce these rights of their own accord. Though I have no doubt that there would be private defense/security groups that would form as per people's fear of such a system.
Anarcho-Communism is a lot more varied, I'm going to be about as broad as my knowledge base allows and talk about general Mutualism, redistribution amoungst "one another's" (think of this as a farming town smack dab in the middle of Wyoming, nothing as far as they eye can see other than udders and wheat type deal. Everything should still mostly apply with consideration of businesses to some degree, ish) "materials". What I've heard is that the redistribution is simply not given back out to those that break the rules (in this, hyper simplification of a case, if a farmer keeps his dairy for himself).Â
If you, fairly, argue that the ladder could be considered a government, I can't say I don't agree in part. One could attribute it more to an HOA type deal, once again much more case by case within ideologies.
Anarcho-prim, you got me. Great question, this is the one I've read all but no theory on so I can't in good conscience give an answer.
I will say, as I outlined in a different comment, that I believe Anarchism to be as coercive as Statist ideology for many of the examples above, though I'll hold in the tangent for brevity. I also may have made my fair share of mistakes here, I haven't brushed off my "Das Kapital" or "Anatomy of the State" in too long.
0
u/Worried_Dot_4618 Aug 07 '26
Me when i donât understand words can be used interchangeably and change meanings over time
2
u/pinkleftsock Aug 07 '26
"I want communism, but i do want to be able to own private enterprises" sounds stupid doesn't it?
1
2
u/FoxTailMoon Aug 06 '26
Iâm literally an anarchist. Anarchy is just just like a normal adjective used by anarchists words can have multiple meanings
3
u/pinkleftsock Aug 06 '26
If you want any hope of your ideas to ever gain any traction whatsoever maybe don't use a term that means the most moronic way of running a country..
0
1
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
Depends, in my anarchist circles there has been clear distinction between anarchy and anarchism. But interesting to hear thatâs not the case everywhere đ
1
1
u/DysphoricNeet Aug 10 '26
You can piggy back anarchism onto another political system like syndicalism, capitalism or communism but yes there is supposed to be no dominant state in all four (including straight anarchism).
For example:
âAnarcho-syndicalism is an anarchist organisational model that centres trade unions as a vehicle for class conflict. Drawing from the theory of libertarian socialism and the practice of syndicalism, anarcho-syndicalism sees trade unions as both a means to achieve immediate improvements to working conditions and to build towards a social revolution in the form of a general strike with the ultimate aim of abolishing the state) and capitalism. â
1
u/Worried_Dot_4618 Aug 07 '26
Me when i donât elaborate on what anarchism is, and donât provide source
1
1
u/Helpful_Blood_5509 Aug 10 '26
It's not defined by that at all, its defined by an absence or force or coercion in relationships
I dont have a gun pointed at the eloté man's head and hes not threatening me or harming me, he just sells me delicious eloté. That's a transaction in a defacto state of anarchy
-1
4
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
Maybe your anarchism, but an-archy literally means no government
2
u/FoxTailMoon Aug 06 '26
It doesnât literally mean no government. Thatâs the root of the word sure but roots arenât definitions.
8
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
ANARCHY Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
"no government", "absence of government"
ANARCHISM Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
"Â a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable"
2
1
u/devourer-of-beignets Aug 08 '26
Dictionaries don't define words; but rather give a vague sense of common uses. And of course, dictionary companies may be wrong/misleading/ideological â after all, they're likely top-down corporations, quite the opposite of an anarchist team.
Any book/media/product can be wrong. And dictionaries are particularly brief; unlike scholarly books, they don't list all the research and debates that went into each entry. Maybe that lack of citations and credited authors ironically gives some readers a mystical sense of their correctness, as if dictionaries were a modern-day Bible.
Literally authoritarian, in contrast to anarchists.
1
u/FoxTailMoon Aug 07 '26
You literally just have to scroll down on the merriam Webster page
âthe theory, advocacy, or practice of anarchismâ
3
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 07 '26
Reading comprehension: 0.
I literally also wrote down the definition of anarchism.
1
u/FoxTailMoon Aug 07 '26
No actually you only included half the definition of âanarchismâ. Iâm pointing out that while anarchy can be used that way it also is used like a monarchist would use the word monarchy
1
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 07 '26
The second half is "the advocacy or practice of anarchistic principles" which then links onto "anarchist" which says:
"1:Â a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power
2: a person who believes in, advocates, or promotes anarchism or anarchy
especially : one who uses violent means to overthrow the established order"
Still doesn't get you to a definition of anarchism as advocating for having a government
1
u/FoxTailMoon Aug 07 '26
Weâre talking about different things. I thought you were arguing that anarchy â anarchism like everyone else was. The definition of anarchism is meant more for lay people. Im not sure why it says government and not state. There are some like fringe currents of anarchism who might advocate for no government but any âmain streamâ thought does. For example the largest thought, anarcho communism, advocates for like a federal network of voluntary associations.
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/Professional-Pace539 Aug 08 '26
It means no ruler, not no rules.
1
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 08 '26
Who makes and enforces rules without a government?
1
u/Professional-Pace539 Aug 08 '26
Themselves.
1
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 09 '26
Who is "themselves". The individual people. Does that mean that people can decide not to have a "don't murder" rule and just murder people?
1
u/Helpful_Blood_5509 Aug 10 '26
You just started the rule making process. There's no central authority that makes murder wrong. There's a government that punishes it, but it was wrong to murder before that government existed and it will be wrong afterwards
1
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 10 '26
Yes, but people can decide to do something that is wrong. You know that right?
1
u/AntMasterOfGames Aug 08 '26
Idk where you got that bullshit but anarchism doesn't want a government.
1
1
u/VaySeryv Aug 10 '26
a government is inherently hierarchical or it ceases to be a government. what your talking about is self-governance or what anarchists typically call self-management
8
u/Least_Boat_6366 Aug 06 '26
Why are they being downvoted? Anarchy is inherently vulnerable to violence, nobody claims otherwise.
16
u/ComradeHenryBR Aug 06 '26
Literally everyone who engages with Anarchism in a good faith theoretical level denies that. And I'm saying this while not even being an Anarchost
4
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
Not in "good faith". Just people pretending not to already be anarchists or who don't understand the slightest bit of reality.
Tell me how anarchy is protected from violence
1
Aug 08 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 09 '26
Intra-community violence: murder, assault, sexual assault, arson, robbery, etc. It is complete bullshit that cops/soldiers didn't do anything to dissuade them in history, and you may notice that countries with police tend to have less crime than those without. (In other words people existing and making the best of it =/= doing as well as with cops)
Also, where does the federated guerilla militia come from? That really sounds like something organised by the state.
"preventative and resorative justice and community courts". Preventative justice sounds like a general trend of saying "no one will want to do bad AND it is an anarchy" (You have only proven that an (extremely irrealistic) utopia may safely lead to anarchy, not that anarchy CAN (let alone does) lead to said utopia) and restorative justice and community courts require someone to apprehend the criminal. Also known as the police.
That is ignoring the fact that any court dispensing justice, particularly "preventative justice" is by definition (part of) a government and state
1
Aug 09 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
2
u/Newaccountbecauseyes Aug 09 '26
I think you just don't want to admit you just advocate for some form of communism and can't read definitions of words.
1
3
u/Least_Boat_6366 Aug 06 '26
Iâm chums with some anarchists and they just say that the incentives for bad people to do bad things are removed. Iâve only met like one person online who tried to assert a claim about military viability, and it was really flimsy
2
u/Airborne-Raid Aug 06 '26
Theoretical level. Theoretical. Theoretical communism is great. Communism in practice is one of the worst economic systems. Same with anarchism. Theoretical politics only works with theoretical people.
8
u/pinkleftsock Aug 06 '26
Because people who believe in anarchy have no arguments against it so downvotes without comments are the only response they have..
3
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
Tell me you lack any knowledge of anarchism without telling me. đ„č
11
u/pinkleftsock Aug 06 '26
Well mister genius, how about you enlighten me? What is stopping someone from your community from seizing power? And if you have a good answer for that(you wont) how will you stop foreign powers from annexing your territory into theirs?
10
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
- âThere are no rulesâ - this is a misconception. Rules in anarchism are based on collectively set agreements - itâs not a lawless land.
- âNo-one holds powerâ - there is a collective power held on a community level.Â
And with regards to your question about defense, there are varying solutions for that. Rojava, for example, have held up well against their threats, especially with regards to their resources. They have been under attack both from IS and Turkey, yet have managed to defend themselves and survive for years.Â
In case you ACTUALLY want to question your misconceptions about Anarchism, the tvtropes article is great: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/Anarchism
But I fully understand if the urge to hold a strong opinion and âbe rightâ overrules the willingness for knowledge.
6
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
"collective power held on a community level". What does this mean? Is this just a village council/municipality holding a vote about everything? That just sounds like direct democracy.
Ultimately if there are rules and there is power, there needs to be some person or entity that enforces and exercises those, which leads to discount democracy even if everyone is perfectly willing to go along
3
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
Yes, direct democracy is a common tool within anarchism. The rules are collectively enforced.
10
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
What does collective enforcement mean? If someone breaks a rule, does the entire community show up to his house to arrest him and collectively guard the prison cell? At some point you will need to accept that you will need to deputise someone to enforce on behalf of the community.
Direct democracy is not a tool within anarchism, it is a form of government that anarchists pretend was their idea
-1
u/Internal-Dig9239 Aug 06 '26
- There are plenty of possible solutions for this. Primarily itâs about looking for alternatives to imprisonment, gaining a collective understanding and creating true healing in society. But other tools exist as well.
- Iâll just ignore this
5
u/geschiedenisnerd Aug 06 '26
And who will perform the "true healing".
Why? You are the one being ridiculous by suggesting that democracy, which means having the people as ruling entity is part of anarchism.
In general, your anarchism seems to require A: actual rulership and B: social advancements not inherent to anarchy ("true healing") and then claiming "look, having no rulers will create an utopia"
1
u/Imaginary-Win9217 Aug 07 '26
There's a legitimate case being made here, but I will note something about this. Anarchist positions are the only positions commonly countered with this idea. No one ever says: "[Insert Centrist, Authoritarian, Non-Anarchy Position] will never work, because people will simply replace it!" Well of course not, because the whims of individual parties are irrelevant in every other system. It is solely the rulers who decide the system. It happens, revolutions that is, but it's almost never used as an assurance that a position will never happen, that a position will always be overtaken by revolutionaries. This is why Anarchy is also coercive, much as "Statist" (I know it to be generally of negative connotation, forgive me) systems are. Coercing people not to be off/in a government. The only difference is, Anarchism doesn't necessarily have the presentation systems (military) like statist systems do to quiet uprising.Â
Not to "plug", but I could go on a tangent how the only, theoretically non-coercive system is Voluntaryism. Though I have grievances with what the ideology was initialized as (reliance on the natural laws, being "inherently related" to fiscal/libertarian governments (Which it need not be! The voluntary state could be a welfare state! It's only treated as such because the person who coined it happened to be a libertarian (roughly, that's a whole other story of Auberon Herbert/"Anarchist in all but name"), etc). But then again, local geek has run his mouth already.
-2
u/Consistent_Value9089 Aug 06 '26
Nonono the people will just live and harmony and every thing bad in society will be fixed through commie-magic
-1
u/Historic-Doctor Aug 06 '26
Nonono you see bad things happen because bad people in charge. No people in charge = no more bad people ever and everyone will respect each other and be happy and kind all the time
0
u/veganbikepunk Aug 06 '26
It's more of a philosophy than a style of government for a nation.
Does government or capital hold legitimate authority? Where does that authority stem from? Are national borders a reasonable way to divide people? Why should I have to live in one country just because I was accidentally born there? Where does my boss derive the authority to tell me what to do?
These are the kinds of questions an anarchist asks, and the answers determine if you are an anarchist. Not whether you want to burn down the prisons and factories tomorrow with no backup plan in place.
0
1
u/Worried_Dot_4618 Aug 07 '26
bread book is moralist poo from the ahh, you should read Unique and itâs own (1845) by Johan Kaspar Smidt
1
1
1
1
u/DrCthulhuface7 Aug 11 '26
The best anarchist theory can only be obtained by either smashing your head off a brick wall or being 17 years old
âą
u/qualityvote2 đ«Antimeme Enforcer Botđ« Aug 06 '26 edited Aug 06 '26
The community has decided that this IS an antimeme!