I’m politically agnostic and have moved from a slightly conservative stance to a vastly more progressive stance (european). i still dont get the more niche things like tankies and anarchists at this point but I would like to, without spending 10 hours reading endless manifests (which do have merit, no doubt, but still).

Can someone explain to me why anarchy isnt the guy (or gal, or gang, or entity) with the bigger stick making the rules?

  • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
    3·
    6 months ago

    I’m not very political or versed in the science about them, but does anarchy exclude guidelines and collaboration? I’d have thought it would enhance those things.

    If there isn’t anything enforcing rules and laws, a government would be informational, making guidelines based on what people found to work best. Like a giant kickstarter paired with Wikipedia.

    Many guidelines will be followed. Like, boil your chicken before eating it. Good to know, and most will do it. Some won’t, for whatever reason.

    Think village assembly, fund-raisers, donations.

    I might be completely off here. In my mind, people work great together, until there are rules to exploit. The best of us always comes out despite enforcing structures.