It's also funny how you released this around the same time my friend finished his own post against anarchism. I think to us it is a matter of semantics more than anything
But there is a deeper biohistory at the basis of that ( https://pkl.net/~node/2RCD/2R/index.html#8 ). Ever since you mentioned minarchy, I've been wanting to share ideas for self-sufficient communities interlinked through continual mutual aid/skillsharing/peacemaking/collaboration. Instead of "seizing the means", useful knowledge must be so ubiquitous that everyone knows how to make anything needed to survive.
Most "management" tends to make organizations that are "toxic" (e.g.: rigid hierarchies based on meritocratic concepts, punishment/reward dynamics and purity spirals, the banality of evil/structural violence fostered by bureaucratic accountability sinks, schizmogenesis through zero-sum games, etc.). In contrast, this kind of organization functions like a healthy and sane organism.
I struggle to hold any ideological opinions of the sort, mainly because there's always a disconnect between what we think is ideal and what we think is reasonably achievable.
I think a pretty common consensus (anarchist, various forms of communism, microcap, whatever) is scaling back, staying within Dunbar's number and all. Within each of these tighter communities, I'm not sure if it really matters what they each do.
one of the crazier crypto-anarchists might be peter thiel, who wants to establish a technocracy, bypassing traditional nation-states in favor of a "network-state" as popularized by balaji. don't think it would amount to anything but another dystopia.
The state (monopoly on violence) creates the conditions necessary for its own existence. Very good post.
It's also funny how you released this around the same time my friend finished his own post against anarchism. I think to us it is a matter of semantics more than anything
Unfortunately I forgot where I read about it, but this concept always stuck with me - A "right" only exists when it's threatened.
Anarchism exists solely for catharsis. The real path is to be like mold.
Beautifully worded, as always. There may be no solutions, but it is nevertheless important to keep repeating this kind of knowledge.
read some other articles on your site, it's great to meet a fellow david graeber fan and anarchist! looking forward to more writings from you
YES! Whether approached spiritually ( https://youtu.be/o7eIVk0W3S4 ) or scientifically ( https://youtu.be/EQnUFxoFqNY ), "government" in most senses of the term is anathema to human flourishing. However, I feel that serious practical work that would render it completely "irrelevant" is relatively scarce (e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_confederalism ).
But there is a deeper biohistory at the basis of that ( https://pkl.net/~node/2RCD/2R/index.html#8 ). Ever since you mentioned minarchy, I've been wanting to share ideas for self-sufficient communities interlinked through continual mutual aid/skillsharing/peacemaking/collaboration. Instead of "seizing the means", useful knowledge must be so ubiquitous that everyone knows how to make anything needed to survive.
Most "management" tends to make organizations that are "toxic" (e.g.: rigid hierarchies based on meritocratic concepts, punishment/reward dynamics and purity spirals, the banality of evil/structural violence fostered by bureaucratic accountability sinks, schizmogenesis through zero-sum games, etc.). In contrast, this kind of organization functions like a healthy and sane organism.
Though it can be complex sometimes, it is not "structureless" ( https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm ). In practice, it is like a combination of fab cities ( https://books.fablabbcn.org/reflowhandbook/contemporary-city-models-and-urban-governance/fab-cities ) with sociocratic ( https://www.sociocracyforall.org/sociocracy/ ) and restorative circles...
...( https://restorativejustice101.com/restorative-circles-a-guide-for-facilitation/ ) which generally follow Ostrom's design principles ( https://youtu.be/QTQPy9tC5WE ) and that are directed towards maintaining the health of every "bioregion" on Earth in ways that are truly "sustainable" ( https://letslearntogether.neocities.org/scispirit/SysDyn/sustainsys ).
It is possible to diagnose where it is "sick" at any level of scale ( https://letslearntogether.neocities.org/scispirit/LST/subsystems01 ) and fix it before it turns parasitic ( https://letslearntogether.neocities.org/scispirit/Misc/newecology ). I can go on and on about the type of "transition engineering" that would be necessary, but hopefully that gives a general idea of what humanity is evolving into.
I struggle to hold any ideological opinions of the sort, mainly because there's always a disconnect between what we think is ideal and what we think is reasonably achievable.
I think a pretty common consensus (anarchist, various forms of communism, microcap, whatever) is scaling back, staying within Dunbar's number and all. Within each of these tighter communities, I'm not sure if it really matters what they each do.
one of the crazier crypto-anarchists might be peter thiel, who wants to establish a technocracy, bypassing traditional nation-states in favor of a "network-state" as popularized by balaji. don't think it would amount to anything but another dystopia.
An absolutely grounded and accurate take, I agree with you in many ways. Always enjoy reading your thoughts on various topics. -k.w