• I_Has_A_Hat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Ok, so you have people willing to work at the wastewater treatment plant. What happens when the Reverse Osmosis pump gives out? Costs $500,000 to replace. Whose going to pay for that? Wait, sorry I forgot we’re in an anarchist society so supposedly no money (if there is money, add on a whole other layer of complexity to the following questions).

    So who’s going to build the pump? People willing to work at the pump factory? Ok, where do they get the materials to build it? I’m assuming none of this is local because logistically that’s practically impossible, so who delivers the materials to them? The pump factory is unlikely to be next door to the wastewater treatment plant, so how is the pump delivered? Who is the specialist that installs the pump? Who makes sure it’s done safely and correctly? Are there consequences if it’s done in a way that doesn’t result in clean water?

    That’s the thing, anarchism seems great whenever everything is working and everything is already in place. The moment something big breaks, anarchism just doesn’t provide enough resources to get it fixed. We would need a post-scarcity society before we could move to something like that.

    • goldyLocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Again, you’re assuming complexity only works if there’s hierarchy and profit at the top.

      Now I’m no hydraulics expert, but I’m pretty sure a reverse osmosis pump does not need a CEO to function. We have engineers, machinists, operators and logistics workers who coordinate their labor. For the last time, anarchism does not mean no organization. It means organization without concentrated ownership and coercive authority.

      The way you frame this makes it sound like the only reason you’d ever lift a finger for anyone is if there’s a paycheck or someone above you making you. That’s not really a strong critique of anarchism. It’s more of a self report about how you see community.

      • Whats_your_reasoning
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Would you (or any other anarchist reading this) ever want to do an AMA? I have questions, but I imagine that asking them here would feel like dog-piling and I don’t want to do that to you. I’m just curious and want to learn more. The last time I heard people take anarchism seriously, school teachers were quick to shut it down.

        I have my own concerns and reservations, but I don’t truly know how much of it exists from being stuck in an authoritarian society, and I simply haven’t heard the solutions yet because of it. I’ve always been a skeptic, and I’m always looking for a new way to think about things, even things I don’t necessarily agree with. I think a question-and-answer session could be quite enlightening.

        I might not be able to go outside this authoritarian box and explore for myself, but an AMA would at least allow me (and others like me) to look out a window.

      • ToastedRavioli@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Anarchism is a political philosophy and movement that seeks to abolish all institutions that perpetuate authority, coercion, or hierarchy

        Why do you think sewage treatment plants exist in the first place? I’ll give you a hint, its not because people came together altruistically to build them (or even regulate that they need to exist).

        The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 was signed because people, left to their own devices, self-destructively pollute their water supplies. That law mandated people couldnt dump shit in the water. It also was passed because state laws weren’t effective at stopping people from polluting the water

        It wasnt enough, so there was the Water Pollution Control Act of 1948. And then the Water Quality Act of 1965. And then the Clean Water Act of 1972, which provided funding to create sewage treatment plants, and mandated that all wastewater be treated to a certain standard. And even that wasnt enough, which is why we later invented the entire EPA, an entity dedicated largely to that one issue (among similar things).

        None of that would have occurred without centralized authority, nor would have been necessary if a plurality of people were not inherently self destructive when left to their own devices. Anarchism is opposed to any central authority. Thereby, under the most basic logic, sewage treatment plants would be virtually guaranteed not to exist in an anarchical non-society society.

        Giving people at large the benefit of the doubt about an issue they have repeatedly shown to fuck up for centuries is silly. And sewage treatment plants require centralization to be built and maintained.

        • goldyLocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 was signed because people, left to their own devices, self-destructively pollute their water supplies. That law mandated people couldnt dump shit in the water. It also was passed because state laws weren’t effective at stopping people from polluting the water

          It’s interesting that you quietly swap in “people” where history mostly shows industrial corporations dumping waste for profit.

          Working class communities were not the ones lobbying to pour chemical sludge into rivers.

          Most of the legislation you listed was not the state heroically saving humanity from itself. It was the state reacting to industrial capital externalizing costs onto the public. Central authority stepped in because private ownership plus profit incentives produced pollution at scale.

          You’re treating absence of centralized state authority as if it means absence of rules, standards or coordination. That is not what anarchism argues. It argues against concentrated political authority. It does not argue against collectively enforced norms.

          You cite centuries of people “fucking up.” A lot of that history is profit driven extraction protected by law, not spontaneous communal self destruction.

          If anything, your examples show that concentrated power and profit incentives required constant correction. That is not a great defense of hierarchy.

          • ToastedRavioli@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s interesting that you quietly swap in “people” where history mostly shows industrial corporations dumping waste for profit.

            I didnt realize corporations were sentient entities capable of acting on their own, rather than groups of people doing people things…

            The 1899 act was legitimately created because everyday people were literally throwing their garbage into water as a form of waste management. So much so that it was difficult to navigate boats safely, ergo “Rivers and Harbors Act” as in the places that were affected by floating masses of garbage

            • HasturInYellow
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              22 hours ago

              There are HIERARCHIES that coerce people within them to put profit above all else or they lose their position in the hierarchy. I can’t tell if you are a troll or just genuinely haven’t put any thought into this at all.

            • goldyLocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              I didnt realize corporations were sentient entities capable of acting on their own, rather than groups of people doing people things…

              I didn’t realize it takes rocket science to understand the difference between individual behavior and institutional incentives.

        • Malfeasant
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          23 hours ago

          It wasnt enough

          And then

          And then

          And even that wasnt enough

          When will it be enough?

      • calcopiritus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        How do those engineers get their education? Do they find a mentor engineer? So for each engineering student you need an already engineer teacher?

        Or would there perhaps be a school of engineering with a hierarchy to organize the engineering lectures so there could be more students per teacher?

        But there’s not only engineering. Perhaps we might also need medical schools, art schools, sewage maintaining schools. Maybe those schools might want to interact with eachother in order to provide consistent curriculums and aid students if they want to switch from one school to another. Perhaps we need a department of education to coordinate all this schools.

        Maybe, like we arrived at the department of education, we might want departments for other matters. Look! A government!

        • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          18 hours ago

          I think that you should read about anarchism because you’re so confused that it’s difficult to explain where.

          councils, working groups, community bodies, assemblies etc are all entirely compatible with anarchy.

          It is not opposition to collectivism, indeed anarchism is (generally) deeply collectivist.

            • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              15 hours ago

              If you’re actually interested and not just being debate-y then I’d suggest you read some foundational literature or if you want stuff that’s more how this might work in practice consider reading about the CNT FAI during the Spanish civil war.

              The government derives its authority from its ability to direct men armed with guns and torture implements to force you to comply on pain of death or agony.

              Seriously if you’re actually curious just read, it’ll be more informative than any silly internet comment section.

              • calcopiritus
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Nah I’m not going to read a book to answer a simple question.

                A government derives its power from its monopoly of violence. If there is no government, that means there is no monopoly of violence. If there is no monopoly of violence, there is no means to enforce rules or laws, since whoever is more powerful (that is, has “more” violence) can just ignore the rule/law.

                Real world examples of anarchist societies do nothing more than prove my point. They are temporary. Anarchist “rule” in Barcelona did not survive the war. No anarchist societies do.

                In order for a political system to stand the test of time, it has to be protected from both external and internal enemies. That is, you need a military and a police. The only way around it is to import your military (that is, have an ally with a strong military willing to protect you). But it doesn’t make much sense to import your police.

                If you don’t protect from exterior enemies, the same as Barcelona happens, an enemy force just invades and asserts its political system. And if you don’t protect from internal enemies, then your own “citizens” can organize themselves and develop their own state that can just take over all the land that your anarchist society used to be in.

                I find it hard to believe that you can have both a military and a police in a system where there are supposedly no rulers.