• barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    Europe was in a state of constant war until they began to form larger, more federal power structures like the EU. This example supports my point.

    The EU has exactly zero capacity to put boots on the ground to stop countries from fighting each other. The only boots it has is FRONTEX, that is, border guards. They wouldn’t stand a chance against the police force of a single larger city.

    It’s not in people’s interest to participate in the anarchist model because it sounds like a huge hassle, an incredibly inefficient way of running a society. Like I would much rather elect someone to make laws on my behalf.

    Noone’s stopping you from doing that. There’s generally plenty of delegation going on. Noone’s putting considerations about the cement mixture used in lamp post foundations to the general council, everyone knows that it’s best left to the engineers.

    While they’re probably not good examples for how things would look in the west because the conditions they operate in are quite different, I recommend looking at how Chiapas and Rojava do things. They don’t get bogged down in meetings. Here’s a couple of videos (also about other places).

    That’s what anarchism is going to look like (in fact, it’s a pretty accurate depiction of real world public consultations).

    That’s what consultations look like if people use the little chance they have to ever get heard in person to air general grievances. Even just emotionally. Can’t expect people to act sensibly in your “conservation of the red-footed sparkle toad” consultation while their community is getting demolished for a highway expansion – without consultation. Replace whatever with whatever in that equation.

    Meanwhile, there’s plenty of studies surrounding sortition (which would be a great intermediate step in many areas) showing that if you take a random sample of people (actually randomised) and sit them together with a couple of experts for at least a couple of days to hash things out, they do come up with very very sensible stuff. More like juries.

    You ask how we can “break the conditioning” but the thing you’re responding to is human nature. So what you’re actually asking is how to brainwash people into all adhering to one system.

    Nah what I’m asking of you is to stop saying “this thing I’m thinking of won’t work because human nature” and instead say “hmm maybe another thing could work” and “probably not perfect but it’s better than we have now and we might learn from it”. You’re not in school, any more, incomplete and approximate answers earn full credit when it comes to catalysing societal change.