• @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 month ago

        Yeah but we can’t use it; it’s why lots of anarchists like wh40k but none of us can play it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -71 month ago

          Just be Orks, its the closest to what a freshly developed anarchy would be… Power vacuum, warlords, etc

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            10
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Jesus you can’t even take me joking about myself, hierarchalists are so intensely actively too fragile and vicious to be any fun.

          • @shneancy
            link
            English
            31 month ago

            anarchy =/= anarchism

              • @shneancy
                link
                English
                01 month ago

                look up the definitions mate, those are simply different things

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -1
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  I’m aware that’s how they present in the dictionary. They are the same in real life.

                  Attempts at anarchism always result in anarchy and as I said, power vacuums etc.

                  Edit After the vacuum, a new hierarchical system presents.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Nuh uh! They’re participating in lively debate through which all parties can come to a ruling by consensus! They’re just really good at it. Um, what’s a ruler again anyways? 🤔

      • @MotoAsh
        link
        English
        -17
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Who enforces the rules if they exist? There is a difference between ruler and enforcer. The fact I have to point this out is sad.

        • @Ultraviolet
          link
          English
          161 month ago

          The game itself only exists while its rules are being followed. They don’t need to be externally enforced, the collective agreement to play the game implies agreeing to its rules.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            English
            -111 month ago

            That is so fucking stupid when talking about laws… Murder doesn’t magically become legal just because someone actually did it…

            • @shneancy
              link
              English
              2
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              in the game of society, participating in society means you agree to the current “rules” of the “game” (laws). And one of those rules is murder -> jail

              • @MotoAsh
                link
                English
                -2
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Yes and who puts them in jail when the murderer doesn’t want to go? An enforcer. God, you morons are being led to water and then shitting in it… Holy fucking pathetic.

                • @shneancy
                  link
                  English
                  11 month ago

                  I was talking about the society as we live in now, since you decided to create a metaphorical connection between board games and reality. I didn’t mean to comment on whatever else you thought people are talking about

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 month ago

          Oh my god dude books have been written about this stuff, youre not actually asking a question; youre trying to excuse tyranny by saying theres no other option.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            English
            -81 month ago

            I’m not excusing tyrrany by simply saying anarchy is not when zero authority. Fucking grow up.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            English
            -15
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            The fact you still do not understand the difference between rule maker and rule enforcer is pathetic. Anarchy is literally beyond your comprehension.

            Rules HAVE to exist. In some form. They HAVE to be enforced in some form. If you assume any enforcer is a boot of a “ruler”, you are literally missing the entire point.

              • @MotoAsh
                link
                English
                -5
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Yet you’re willing to mouth off with ignorance despite, “just getting here”. Fucking pathetic. Do better.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  2
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Cringe, honestly dude all your comments tell me you’re 14. I just joined the thread with one comment and you start hurling insults. Actually child like behavior.

                  You literally said anarchism is beyond my comprehension despite it being one of the hardest to define political terminologies. YOU don’t even know what it means because it means 100 different things to 100 different grouos of people

                  One day you’ll get a 2 in front of your age and feel embarrassed about how fucking idiotic you make yourself look all the time.

            • @ThatWeirdGuy1001
              link
              English
              81 month ago

              No I think you and most anarchists are.

              The moment you create rules and create enforcers those enforcers become the rulers.

              If they have the power to enforce rules then they have higher authority and therefore status.

              Don’t get me wrong I love the concept. The problem is the concept completely ignores that humans naturally develop hierarchy. We won’t deliberately pick the roles they’ll just naturally develop over time.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 month ago

                And theres no way to counterbalance or fix or even mitigateany of this, i know because i just thought about it for almost an entire half of a second!

                Obviously theres no way to do maintenance or draw someone back in from shitty behavior other than shooting them. Obviously theres no way to get someone to chill out other than shooting them. There are no human behaviors; ingrained or learned, that could possibly fix any of this or serve as levelling mechanisms.

                Unfortunately, we can’t stop things that ‘happen naturally’ and so we shouldn’t try, and that’s why I’m against the criminalization of murder and rape, and honestly pretty eager to die of cancer.

                so therefore we must have massive globe spanning potentially apocalyptic decades long pissing matches and everything must be grinding the weak into dust and delusional assholes totally disconnected from any material concern making the worst possible decisions must make every decision for everyone, even if it literally ends all life by ruining earth.

              • @MotoAsh
                link
                English
                -14
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Enforcers only become rulers when they’re given both immunity and the ability to make shit up.

                The fact you fundamentally do not understand the difference between rule maker and rule enforcer is pathetic.

                If you like the concept, then maybe understand how it’s actually supposed to function. Rules HAVE to exist. Enforcers HAVE to exist. How do you do that fairly? Yes, nature has tendencies, which is why humans create rules and enforcers to resist natural tendencies.

                Humans are supposed to be GREATER than “dumb animals”, yet all I ever hear is people whining about how it it’s unnatural… NO SHIT!! That’s the entire point!!

                In nature, the strong eat the weak, the end. Game over. We need to create rules and enforcers to make a better environment than is natural. Creating rules requires at least a temporary “ruler” (that doesn’t ‘have’ to be a single person). If you claim ANY ruler is ALWAYS bad, you are quite literally forgetting how not-nature works in its entirety.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  91 month ago

                  Mutual Aid: A factor of Evolution

                  Rules don’t have to be enforced if everybody makes the rules and agrees to follow them. A society built on cooperation, free association, and consent is possible.

                  Your conception of “natural tendencies” and “the strong eat the weak” smacks of social darwinism. Social darwinism is pseudoscientic bullshit.

                  You’re wrong, plain and simple

                • @Sanctus
                  link
                  English
                  61 month ago

                  How do you keep the enforcers from becoming the rulers? Who enforces the enforcers? Other enforcers? What’s to stop them from banding together just like cops do now? Eliminating hierarchy requires many other conditions be met to not just turn into authoritarianism or something similar.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Look at it from an information theory (applied to organization it’s called systems theory, cybernetics, or scientific management) perspective: when you put one guy in charge of too much stuff (and let’s face it; its usually gonna be a guy, because misogyny ud a feature not a bug of these systems), you have to compress all the data coming to him, and all the orders will be based on increasingly shitty abstracted models as you try to make him in charge of more stuff. Even if that guy is the absolute best, he literally cannot have good information, and the more fine grained his control, basically the more its just a crap shoot.

                  So yes. Centralized authority is bad, and it can be proven with math. You can try to hedge it, you can try to optimize it, but its got a fundamental flaw, not just from a moral perspective, but a mathematical one. Please don’t make me look up the actual numbers; I’m on mobile.

                • queermunist she/her
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -51 month ago

                  Rules HAVE to exist. Enforcers HAVE to exist.

                  Yes, that’s the fundamental contradiction of anarchism. Rules need rulers.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            English
            -11 month ago

            By not having immunity from equitable rules and by not having the ability to just make shit up and arrest people for it?

            This isn’t rocket science. Enforcers CAN be subject to rules too, regardless how much US police are not.

              • @MotoAsh
                link
                English
                -3
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                It’s only delusional if you assume what kind of enforcer I would approve of.

      • _NoName_
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 month ago

        Everyone.

        As opposed to disciplinary action carried out by a central authority, rule breakers just get slapped by every community member in a revolving door fashion.

          • _NoName_
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 month ago

            You use the old ladies on the balconies. They see everything.

            Or whatever means you wanna do, there’s no hard and fast rule on how the system is structured - just that hierarchies be limited and only exist as long as necessary, and authority remain as evenly distributed throughout the community as possible.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 month ago

              Old ladies on balconies, or any form of social enforcement of traditional laws, are known for being fair judges of character, egalitarian, impartial in their rulings, and open to people being themselves.

        • Subverb
          link
          English
          11 month ago

          deleted by creator

          • _NoName_
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I think you’re assuming I mean “there are no fast and hard rules, period”, when I mean “the structure of each group is mostly up to what the internal community decides is best”.

            There is no system that is perfect, but we’ve had the entirety of human history to show that authoritarian systems are consistently bad for the humans, like flesh between the cogs. I’d much rather a web of communities in solidarity and negotiation, using their collective knowledge to forge onward.

      • @Valmond
        link
        English
        41 month ago

        There will be like an invisible hand …

  • @Leviathan
    link
    English
    381 month ago

    How to be anarchist:

    Step 1: follow the rules we all agree upon.

    Step 2: don’t play (cohabitate) with people who refuse to follow the agreed upon rules.

    Step 3: enjoy peaceful game (life) with people who don’t shit on their own activities just to win.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 month ago

      Step 1: follow the rules we all agree upon.

      You’d be surprised at how difficult it is to find rules we can all agree on.

      • @Leviathan
        link
        English
        171 month ago

        You can usually find them in the box with the rest of the game.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 month ago

          Those are the first thing that get lost, together with half the plastic tanks (probably eaten by the dog or your little cousin). So in the end, you make up some of the rules and use tinfoil instead of the tanks.

          Btw, did you know you can get a loan from the Monopoly bank with interests at market rate? /s

          • @Leviathan
            link
            English
            21 month ago

            I don’t want to just come back with an answer every time but we’re all in our 30s and we played the monopoly set we grew up with last summer at our parents’ place with the nieces and nephews and it still has rules and all. I think the only things missing were the original dice as there were about 4 different sets of different colors and sizes in there.

            I get what you’re saying, but the metaphor kinda follows through in that when everyone at the table sits down and takes a minute to set the house rules and stuff we can all play in relative harmony.

            Monopoly’s easy, it’s just like:

            • Free parking?

            • Auctions?

            • Loans?

            • Mortgaging and stuff?

            and you’re pretty much good to go once you agree on those things.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 month ago

      People often confuse anarchists (those who don’t believe in having a political ruling class) with chaos.

  • @niemcycle
    link
    English
    111 month ago

    Something something Engels something something justified hierarchy

      • @doublejay1999
        link
        English
        -91 month ago

        Satire is primarily meant to deflate the power of those that don’t deserve it, and more generally in comedy, you punch up, not down.

          • @doublejay1999
            link
            English
            -31 month ago

            Go back to your Lego - Your mom wants her laptop back.