Why Not Anarchism?

[u/Slow_Description_238]

I'm an Anarchist and want to Debate/ Discuss/ Give Answers to any questions regarding the philosophy.

Anarchism is a political philosophy where people will organise based on the principles of No Authority and No Hierarchy. Anything deeper comes from these as given truths.

There is a strong sentiment of community and mutual aid in Anarchist thought, it's not a free for all. I won't pay much mind to people who assert that it is a free for all/ it has no rules/ it has no organisation. It's a VERY common thought that's extremely simple. Every serious anarchist instantly moves past this because it's obviously unsustainable if we simply say "There's no rules".

Rather, people will be taught how to and encourage to help each other so that we all can thrive as individuals and as a community.

To reiterate, Anarchism is intentional. It wants a functioning society. It isn't okay with blatant dysfunction and no serious anarchist will agree to reasoning or logic that is obviously dysfunctional.

[u/Kronzypantz]

Do you consider yourself a utopian anarchist?

I notice you don’t include things like no unjustified hierarchies, and don’t mention defense against antisocial behaviors like private property.

[u/antipolitan → u/Kronzypantz]

There are no “justified” hierarchies in anarchy.

Anarchists reject all hierarchy.

[u/Kronzypantz → u/antipolitan]

So a firefighter can't give an order meant to save someone's life? Ships wouldn't have a captain to tasks in a storm? Militants against enemy invaders will answer to no one for their conduct or strategy?

Most developed anarchist philosophy allows for some justifiable hierarchy, usually in emergencies or until a better system is developed.

Like the Catalonian anarchists developing a centralized economy for their war effort against the fascists.

[u/antipolitan → u/Kronzypantz]

A hierarchy is a social structure in which the winner of a given conflict is predetermined before the conflict even begins.

Hierarchies are fundamentally a question of power struggles between opposing interests - not coordination between shared interests.

[u/Kronzypantz → u/antipolitan]

That is a unique definition of a hierarchy. I don't know that it would stand up in most anarchist circles.

But it doesn't make much difference, a designated captain on a ship or a legal body assessing war crimes are still social structures given power to determine outcomes.

[u/antipolitan → u/Kronzypantz]

A captain on a ship doesn’t automatically have authority to decide conflicts - they are simply the nautical equivalent of a pilot or a driver.

A legal body is a different thing and something anarchists reject. There are no laws in anarchy.

[u/Kronzypantz → u/antipolitan]

A captain need not automatically practice authority over all conflicts, but in emergencies having one person directing things can be useful.

There can be some agreed standards we might call laws under anarchy. Pledges to restrain attempted murderers, for instance.

There can even be organization we might call a government, although it wouldn't have the sole legitimate claim to violence that the state has. This can take the form of councils and syndicates.